Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Unpopular PrivacyWhat Must We Hide?$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Anita Allen

Print publication date: 2011

Print ISBN-13: 9780195141375

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2012

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195141375.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 16 June 2021

Privacies Not Wanted

Privacies Not Wanted

(p.2) (p.3) 1 Privacies Not Wanted
Unpopular Privacy

Anita L. Allen

Oxford University Press

This chapter argues that privacy is a ‘foundational’ good to which the United States and similar nations should have a substantive commitment as they do to personal freedom and equality. Foundational goods are the resources typical persons will need as bases for self-respect and to enjoy core liberties. For the sake of foundational goods, including physical and informational privacy, liberal societies properly educate, incentivize, nudge, and where necessary, coerce.People should be taught to value others' privacy and their own. When people abandon privacies typically needed for self-respect, reputation, confidential relationships and other forms of flourishing, it is time to consider mandating the privacy that is unwanted or to which people have become indifferent. Because both opportunities for privacy and the actual experience of privacy are vitally important, privacy cannot be left solely to the realm of waiver-eligible free choices. Not all privacy rights are best considered alienable. We need to extend debates -- common in feminist literatures -- about balancing freedom from unwanted rights of privacy on the one hand with duties of privacy on the other. Privacy theorists should add to their routine agendas contextual explorations of the extent to which varied forms of privacy are legitimately imposed by law even in the face of unwelcoming targets and beneficiaries. A central question for privacy scholars is this: when is coercing privacy by state mandate required by background political ideals, and when does coercing privacy contradict background ideals? While coercing privacy is highly desirable from a liberal democratic point of view, it is also potentially dangerous. Ultimately society must constrain the power to mandate privacy, not only to promote ideals of responsible freedom, but also to promote ideals of responsible government.

Keywords:   paternalism, liberalism, feminism, freedom of information, inalienable right, ‘don't ask don't tell,’, ‘waiver or rights,’, peeping-Tom, confidentiality, libertarian, Big Brother, Joyce Maynard, JD Salinger

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .