My column last week about a female singer showing her underpants in a Super Girl contest caused controversy among cyberspace critics. Some of them showed perplexity about our society's attitude towards sexual openness.

In fact, my column did not discuss what constitutes an immoral or indecent act in terms of sex. Instead, it focused on criticizing some media columnists' practice of trying to attract readers' attention by intentionally saying something against what most common people believe in about social ethics.

Since my critics are curious about how Chinese society looks at sexual openness, it is worthwhile to spend a few more words on the topic.

Some of them argued that exposure of underpants is nothing serious at all since much more daring exposure of the human body is acceptable in modern civilization.

That argument is not wrong. It has long been that nudity is no longer a taboo in China. Images of nude beauties in fine arts exhibitions wouldn't scare away even the most conservative spectators. And even an old farmer would not fuss about the scene of women in bikinis in a swimming pool.

However, the moral standard is not absolute in all circumstances. The acceptability of bikinis in a public bath does not mean they are acceptable in a public bus. What is vital here is the respect for other people's right to a decent environment. A streaker rushing onto a football pitch is as rude as an impeccably dressed intruder on a nude beach.

This is sort of a "theory of relativity," if the term can be used jokingly. (Actually, Einstein used an example of spending a long time in the company of a beautiful woman to illustrate his theory of relativity.) Everything has the nature of relativity. Nothing is absolute. What is acceptable in one occasion may not be deemed decent in another occasion. The Super Girl singer would not be thought to be going against social norms if she wore a bathing suit in a swimming pool; but when she unveils strikingly white pants from under her dark skirt, the act is offensive, for it implies sexual seduction.

Women tennis players usually wear miniskirts. Their underpants often glare from under the skirts when they exert their full strength to strike the ball. They definitely have no intention to show the pants but they always try not to allow a convenient angle for the peeping lens.

Defenders of the Super Girl may quote the words of the columnist I criticized in my column: "The lifting of the skirt hem is nothing dreadful, nor is what was exposed to our eyes. What is really worrisome is what we have in our mind."

This argument sounds plausible but is actually illogical. Some audiences may enjoy the act out of a "dirty mind" but this does not justify the dirty nature of the act itself.

Let's take an example. Yesterday, a story published by a local media outlet in Guangzhou in South China reported a female student's complaint against her roommate's spending nights with her boyfriend on a curtain-screened bed in their college dorm room. It is a common sense that whatever the lovers did constitutes an insult to the other girls in the room.

Sure enough, it is no longer a serious sin for college students to have sex. Even their teachers and parents turn a blind eye to the new trend. But they must keep it a private affair. Excessive expression of amorousness in public places is still an offensive act in today's Chinese society (and I believe it is so in many other countries, too).

The reason is simple: One should respect other people's sense of shame.

Just imagine how the annoyed girls in the above-mentioned story would react if the couple said to them: "What we do behind the curtain is not dreadful. Nor is it your business. What is really worrisome is what you have in your mind."

Email: liushinan@chinadaily.com.cn

(China Daily 08/16/2006 page4)