As the jury prepares to deliberate on Sean “Diddy” Combs’ criminal case in Manhattan on June 30, the trial’s implications are reaching far beyond the courtroom. At its core, the case involves disturbing allegations of sex trafficking, coercion, and drug use—but it’s also sparked a deeper societal conversation about the meaning of consent, the ethics of non-monogamy, and the misuse of alternative lifestyles as legal defenses.
The music mogul, 55, was arrested in September on federal charges that include racketeering, sex trafficking, and transportation for prostitution. During closing arguments on June 27, Combs’ defense team, led by attorney Marc Agnifilo, spent five hours attempting to reframe the narrative: What prosecutors claimed was criminal behavior, Agnifilo argued, was in fact consensual, falling under what he called a “swinger” lifestyle.
He pointed to Combs’ long-term relationship with singer Cassie Ventura—who has testified against him—as a deeply romantic one. “If you had to give their sex life a label, I guess you can call it swingers,” Agnifilo told the jury.
But this defense has struck a nerve with many in the non-monogamous community, who argue that such a framing not only misrepresents what ethical non-monogamy actually is, but potentially damages communities that work hard to center consent, communication, and respect.
Cassie Ventura—who testified under the name Casandra Ventura Fine—delivered emotional and disturbing testimony on May 13. She detailed how Combs allegedly forced her into “freak offs,” drug-fueled sex parties that could last between 36 and 72 hours. According to her, these sessions left her recovering for hours, sometimes days, suffering from dehydration, exhaustion, and the aftereffects of substances she claims she was pressured to use.
She also described being coerced into demeaning sexual performances, often involving multiple people and surveillance by Combs himself. Her account was not just about the physical toll—it was a window into a psychological dynamic that has become central to the prosecution’s case: the imbalance of power between a global celebrity and a woman who says she felt she couldn’t say no.
Combs’ defense counters that everything was consensual. His lawyers say his accusers, especially Cassie, are now distorting consensual sex acts and party scenes into something criminal. Agnifilo went so far as to describe the relationship as one of mutual love and exploration. But the court—and the public—is being forced to grapple with a critical question: Can someone meaningfully consent when power, fame, and control are so disproportionately held by one party?
Brett Chamberlin, executive director of the organization OPEN (Organization for Polyamory and Ethical Non-monogamy), doesn’t mince words: using the swinger lifestyle as a legal defense to explain away abusive behavior, he says, “mischaracterizes what these relationship structures are about.”
“This is not swinging,” Chamberlin stated. “It’s manipulation. It’s abuse. And it hurts communities that are actually committed to honest, respectful, and consensual relationships.”
The ethics of non-monogamy are built on a foundation of clear, enthusiastic, and revocable consent, Chamberlin and others insist. That means all parties must enter into any sexual activity freely, with full knowledge and without coercion—something critics say was lacking in Combs’ interactions, based on the testimony and allegations presented.
Susan Wright, spokesperson for the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, explained that the core of any non-monogamous arrangement is not just agreement, but enthusiastic, informed, and repeated agreement. “Non-monogamous people joke that they spend more time talking about sex than having it,” she said. “That’s because real consent takes communication, boundaries, and respect.”
Swinging is a form of consensual non-monogamy where couples or individuals engage in sexual activities with others, often in a group setting. Contrary to popular belief and media portrayals, swinging is highly structured and often tightly bound by community norms focused on safety and communication.
It’s estimated that less than 2% of couples actively participate in swinging, although some surveys suggest up to 15% of married couples have tried it at least once. At the center of all swinger events, though, is the principle of enthusiastic, informed, and ongoing consent.
This means all parties are aware of what’s happening, agree without pressure, can withdraw consent at any time, and are not under the influence of drugs or alcohol in a way that impairs judgment. Many events even have designated “monitors” who do not participate but instead ensure attendees feel safe and respected, according to Wright.
“Drugs and alcohol are usually discouraged at swinger events,” noted George, a sex and relationship coach based in Cleveland, Ohio, who specializes in non-monogamy. “That’s because substances can cloud someone’s ability to give or withdraw consent. Body language becomes harder to read, and power dynamics can be exploited.”
One of the most troubling aspects of the Diddy trial is the significant power imbalance between Combs and the women who have come forward with allegations. Sheila Addison, a couples and sex therapist based in Seattle, says this imbalance raises serious concerns about the validity of any claimed consent.
“If you’re going to ask people to do something and invite people to do something, that burden is on you to be really clear that this is an invitation – not an order or command,” Addison said. “And when someone holds that much power—fame, money, status—it’s often impossible for the other person to truly say no.”
Chamberlin agrees. “In ethical non-monogamy, these principles aren’t optional—they’re the foundation,” he said. “It’s not about sexual freedom at the expense of others. It’s about creating relationships built on honesty and care.”
He added that when people in power use terms like “swinger” to describe behavior that is coercive or harmful, they’re not only deflecting accountability—they’re harming communities that are already misunderstood and stigmatized.
The use of the swinger lifestyle in Combs’ legal defense has sent ripples through non-monogamous communities. Advocates worry that the trial could reinforce long-standing misconceptions: that swinging is inherently unsafe, hedonistic, or disrespectful to boundaries.
George, the Cleveland-based relationship coach, said, “It’s really irresponsible and damaging to the community. Swinging is not some free-for-all. It’s about mutual trust. It’s about being hyper-aware of others’ comfort. Using our identities and practices to excuse abusive behavior is offensive—and dangerous.”
A recent New York Times investigation into a Brooklyn sex club scandal highlighted the challenges of maintaining consent and accountability, even in communities dedicated to it. Some former members alleged sexual misconduct, reinforcing the fact that even in spaces built around ethical sexual exploration, vigilance is crucial.
What’s emerging from the Diddy trial is not just a reckoning for one man but a broader societal examination of how we define consent—and how we fail to protect it in the face of power, fame, and money.
Cassie’s testimony is not just one woman’s story; it reflects a pattern of silencing and manipulation that often accompanies relationships with large imbalances. And while Combs’ defense may try to frame their relationship as one of consensual exploration, experts say that the repeated presence of coercion, drug use, and emotional control paints a far darker picture.
To the non-monogamous community, the difference between ethical relationships and abuse is clear. “Anything other than ‘heck yes’ is a no,” said Chamberlin. “Ethical non-monogamy is about creating more honest, communicative relationships—not about excusing harmful behavior.”
The courtroom verdict will determine Combs’ legal fate, but the societal conversation it has ignited may lead to deeper and more lasting changes—ones that could impact how consent is taught, how power is understood in relationships, and how alternative lifestyles are protected from being weaponized in defense of abuse.
As the jury returns to deliberate, they are being asked to weigh complex issues—legal, emotional, and cultural. But for many outside the courtroom, the trial has already raised a more important verdict: that no matter what form a relationship takes, the cornerstone must always be informed, enthusiastic, and ongoing consent.
Whether or not the jury finds Sean “Diddy” Combs guilty, the cultural consequences of this trial may already be clear. It’s not enough to say something was consensual. True consent involves balance—of power, of understanding, of desire. It’s about communication, not just compliance.
In the end, the court may decide Combs’ legal fate. But the broader community is tasked with an even greater responsibility: ensuring that terms like “swinging,” “non-monogamy,” and “open relationship” are not misused, distorted, or weaponized. These relationship structures, when practiced ethically, represent some of the most thoughtful and transparent models of intimacy we have. They deserve understanding, not misrepresentation.
And most importantly, survivors like Cassie—whose voices bring these hidden stories to light—deserve to be heard, believed, and protected.
