marginalia's day just isn't complete with a Globe and Mail link. Today's link is an editorial about the Little Sisters supreme court case. And people say the G&M is a stuffy conservative paper:

A better solution would be to refine the Butler definition of pornography. Rather than condemning all depictions of violence against women (and men), the law could ask whether the violent act is real or merely theatrical. This would cover sadomasochistic literature where the erotic charge comes not so much from the small amount of pain inflicted, but very much from the props (whips, leather etc.) of what is, in essence, sexual theatre.

And check out the teaser line for the editorial: "Let's not flagellate ourselves: It's tough when the sex is rough." Not to mention that the html file itself is called EWHIP.

S&M - G&M: together at last!

(If you want to learn more about the Little Sister's case, check out their web site.)