Privacy and Sexuality in a Society Divided Over Moral Culture

Abstract

In this article, I develop an individuality-based conception of the right to privacy that can be used to protect the freedoms of sexual choice and inti mate association. In doing so, I draw on John Stuart Mill's concept of indi viduality and his celebration of lifestyle experimentation. This formulation of the right to privacy is defended against a critic, Jed Rubenfeld, who uses Michel Foucault's critique of the repressive hypothesis to argue that an individuality-based conception of the right to privacy will inevitably im pose standardized sexual identities on individuals. In response to Rubenfeld, I argue that the position that sexuality is central to self-definition does not depend on the assumption that speaking the truth about sex will set us free. The aim of the individuality-based conception of the right to privacy that I am advocating is not to fix identities, but to open up greater room for lifestyle experimentation.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).

Cohen, Jean. 1992. "Redescribing Privacy: Identity, Difference, and the Abortion Controversy." Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 3: 43-116.

Coontz, Stephanie. 1992. The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap. New York: Basic Books.

Foucault, Michel. 1978. History of Sexuality, An Introduction, Volume One. trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Random House.

_. 1988. "Sexual Choice, Sexual Act: Foucault and Homosexuality " In Lawrence D. Kritzman , ed., Politics, Philosophy, Culture: Interviews and Other Writings 1977-1984 . New York: Routledge.

_. 1982. "The Subject and Power." In Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow , eds., Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Galston, William A. 1991. Liberal Purposes: Goods, Virtues and Diversity in the Liberal State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Garrow, David J. 1994. Liberty and Sexuality: The Right to Privacy and the Making of Roe v. Wade New York: Macmillan .

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).

10.

Humboldt, Wilhelm von. 1993. The Limits of State Action. J. W Burrow , ed. Indianapolis: The Liberty Fund.

11.

Kaplan, Morris B. 1994. "Intimacy and Equality: The Question of Lesbian and Gay Marriage." The Philosophical Forum 25: 333-66.

12.

Karst, Kenneth L. 1980. "The Freedom of Intimate Association" Yale Law Journal 89: 624-692.

13.

_. 1993. Laws Promise, Law's Empire: Visions of Power in the Politics of Race, Gender, and Religion New Haven: Yale University Press.

14.

Mill, John Stuart. 1975. On Liberty. David Spitz , ed. New York: Norton .

15.

Miller, James. 1993. The Passion of Michel Foucault. New York: Doubleday.

16.

Minnow, Martha , ed. 1993. Family Matters: Readings on Family and Law. New York: The New Press.

17.

Rubenfeld, Jed. 1989. "The Right to Privacy." Harvard Law Review 102: 737-807.

18.

Stacey, Judith. 1990. Brave New Families. New York : Basic Books.

19.

Skolnick, Arlene , and Stacey Rosencrantz . Summer 1994. "The New Crusade for the Old Family" The American Prospect, Number 18, pp. 59-65.

20.

Stone, Lawrence. March 2, 1989. "The Road to Polygamy." The New York Review of Books.

21.

Taylor, Charles. 1985. "What's Wrong with Negative Liberty," In Philosophy and the Human Science: Philosophical Papers 2 Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

22.

Thorne, Barrie , with Marilyn Yalom , eds. 1992. Rethinking the Family: Some Feminist Questions. Boston: Northeastern Press.

23.

Tribe, Laurence H. 1978. American Constitutional Law. Mineola: New York University Press.