When Shulamith Firestone’s body was found late last August, in her  studio apartment on the fifth floor of a tenement walkup on East Tenth  Street, she had been dead for some days. She was sixty-seven, and she  had battled schizophrenia for decades, surviving on public assistance.  There was no food in the apartment, and one theory is that Firestone  starved, though no autopsy was conducted, by preference of her Orthodox  Jewish family. Such a solitary demise would have been unimaginable to  anyone who knew Firestone in the late nineteen-sixties, when she was at  the epicenter of the radical-feminist movement, surrounded by some of  the same women who, a month after her death, gathered in St. Mark’s  Church In-the-Bowery, to pay their respects
     http://crookedtimber.org/2013/04/09/shumalith-firestone-feminism-and-the-private-life-of-power/ 
by 
Corey Robin on 
April 9, 2013 In 
The Reactionary Mind, I wrote:
One of the reasons the subordinate’s  exercise of agency so agitates the conservative imagination is that it  takes place in an intimate setting. Every great blast—the storming of  the Bastille, the taking of the Winter Palace, the March on  Washington—is set off by a private fuse: the contest for rights and  standing in the family, the factory, and the field. Politicians and  parties talk of constitution and amendment, natural rights and inherited  privileges. But the real subject of their deliberations is the private  life of power: “Here is the opposition to woman’s equality in the  state,” Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote. “Men are not ready to recognize it  in the home.” Behind the riot in the street or debate in Parliament is  the maid talking back to her mistress, the worker disobeying her boss.  That is why our political arguments—not only about the family but also  the welfare state, civil rights, and much else—can be so explosive: they  touch upon the most personal relations of power.