p Dear friend,

p I strongly advise you to write the plan of the pamphlet in more detail. Otherwise too much is not clear.

p I should state one opinion already now:

p § 3-1 advise you to throw out entirely "the demand (female) for free love”.

p This would, in fact, be not a proletarian, but a bourgeois demand.

p As a matter of fact, what do you understand by it? What can be understood by it?

p (1) Freedom from material (financial) considerations in the matter of love?

p (2) from material cares as well?

p (3) from religious prejudices?

p (4) from the father’s ban, etc.?

p (5) from the prejudices of “society”?

p (6) from a narrow environment (peasant or philistine or bourgeois-intellectual) ?

p (7) from the bonds of the law, the court and the police?

p (8) from what is serious in love?

p (9) from child-birth?

p (10) freedom of adultery? etc.

p I have listed several (not all, of course) of the shades of meaning. You understand, of course, not Nos. 8-10, but either Nos. 1-7 or something like Nos. 1-7.

p But a different wording for Nos. 1-7 should be chosen, for free love does not accurately express this idea.

p But the public reading the pamphlet will inevitably take "free love" in general as being in the nature of Nos. 8-10, even against your will.

p It is precisely because in modern society the most garrulous, clamorous and “prominent” classes understand "free love" in the sense of Nos. 8-10, for just that reason this is not a proletarian, but a bourgeois demand.

p Most important for the proletariat are Nos. 1-2, and then Nos. 1-7, and that, properly speaking, is not "free love”.

p It is not a question of what you subjectively "want to mean" by this. It is a question of the objective logic of class relations in matters of love.

Friendly shake hands, W. I. Written in Berne, on January 17, 1915