How was Bowers v Hardwick different from Lawrence v Texas? In what ways was Michael "imperfect"? Did he counter the "asexual" norm that Godsoe identified as so important to the self-presentation of plaintiffs in the Obergefell case? And if so, where did that imperfect character show up? Did he put himself in the news? Did the oral argumentation reference him as a character (as opposed to staying focused on the abstract concepts his case represented)?

REFRENCES:

In Lawrence v Texas case both plaintiffs were imperfect and therefore the defense attorneys did everything they could to keep them out of the public eye, which proved to workthe majority opinion talked about the right to sexual privacy through the lens of love and domestic intimacy, without referencing the plaintiffs in any specific way

Lawrence v. Texas :https://www.oyez.org/cases/2002/02-102

Bowers v. Hardwick:https://www.oyez.org/cases/1985/85-140

https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/perfect-plaintiffs

(Cynthia Godsoe)