NEGATIVE - CRITIQUE - FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF PRIVACY 132
A EXTPRIVACY LAW LINKSPRIVACY REIFIES WOMENS DOMESTIC ROLE
PRIVACY WILL ALWAYS ASSOCIATE WOMEN AS ALIGNED WITH THE PRIVATE SPHERE AND DOMESTIC ACTIVITIES
Carole Paterman, Prof. of Political Science at the University of California Los Angeles, 1998; FEMINISM, THE PUBLIC AND THE PRIVATE, "The Patriarchal Welfare State," EE2001-hxm p. 245-246
Hegel's social order contains a double separation of the private and public: the class division between civil society and the state (between economic man and citizen, between private enterprise and the public power); and the patriarchal separation between the private family and the public world of civil society/state. Moreover, the public character of the sphere of civil society/state is constructed and gains its meaning through what it excludesthe private association of the family. The patriarchal division between public and private is also a sexual division. Women, naturally lacking the capacities for public participation, remain within an association constituted by love, ties of blood, natural subjection and particularity, and in which they are governed by men. The public world of universal citizenship is an association of free and equal individuals, a sphere of property) rights and contract-and of men, who interact as formally equal citizens.
PRIVACY LAW DERIVES FROM SEXUAL PRIVACY AND HETEROSEXISM
Lauren Berlant, teacher of English at the University of Chicago, 1998; FEMINISM, THE PUBLIC AND THE PRIVATE, "Live Sex Acts (Parental Advisory: Explicit Material),"EE2001-hxm p. 279-80
'Zone of privacy' is a technical phrase, invented in a SupremeCourt opinion of 1965. It was justice William 0. Douglass's opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut that designated for the first time the heterosexual act of intercourse in marital bedrooms as protected by a zone of privacy into which courts must not peer and with which they must not interfere. justice Douglass's rezoning of the bedroom into a nationally protected space of privacy allowed married citizens of Connecticut for the first time to purchase birth control. It sought to make national a relation that it says precedes the Bill of Rights. It consolidated the kind of thinking that happened when the justices recently, in Bowers v. Hardwick, confirmed the irreducible heterosexuality of the national bedroom, as it established once again that homosexuality has no constitutionally supported privacy protections in the United States. It could have been otherwise. Writing a memo to be circulated among Supreme Court justices, Daniel Richman, a clerk for Thurgood Marshall, sought to instruct the Court about oral and anal sex. He wrote to the justices, in capital letters, 'THIS IS NOT A CASE ABOUT ONLY HOMOSEXUALS. ALL SORTS OF PEOPLE DO THIS KIND OF THING . He does not name the 'sorts' of people. But in almost referring to heterosexuality, that sacred national identity that happens in the neutral territory of national culture, Richman almost made the 'sex' of heterosexuality imaginable, corporeal, visible, public.