While technology has changed the dynamics of how law enforcement deals with pornography cases, the question of what constitutes pornography is an age-old debate.

Although pornography itself is legal in the United States, expression that shows an actual sex act is considered obscenity and is illegal, said Barbara Mack, associate professor in the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication.

“Obscenity is material that is legally prohibited,” she said. “It includes a graphic depiction or display of sexual activity that does not have social, artistic or educational value. It is material that is designed to appeal to a ‘prurient’ or an unhealthy interest in sex.”

Mack said obscenity involves actual sex acts, while pornography does not.

Mack said, ultimately, it is up to a jury to decide whether something is considered legal artistic expression or obscenity.

An example of a case where a controversial decision was made by a jury was that of Robert Mapplethrope, a photographer who took “beautiful photographs of flowers and frightening photographs of sadomasochism,” including one man urinating into the mouth of another and another man with the end of a whip inserted in his rectum and curled around his back, Mack said. The jury decided the work had artistic value and was not obscene.

John Cunnally, associate professor of art and design, said the criteria of pornography for the general public varies from generation to generation.

“A classic example of a piece that has been debated upon as pornographic or not can be found in the paintings in the Sistine Chapel by Michelangelo in Rome,” Cunnally said.

“At the time the paintings were finished, they were viewed as fine art. But by several centuries later, public criticism demanded that some of the characters be painted over with clothing.”

Cunnally said he believes the average citizen is more sensitive to possible pornographic art today than in the past, but he said he is opposed to any restrictions that limit an artist’s ability to create what he or she wants.

“I believe that the less restriction that is placed on art, the better,” he said.

“In dealing with pornography, I feel that the censorship process is something of a paradox. What most people consider pornography is what will offend or hurt other people’s morals upon viewing it. What about the person who viewed it in the first place? Are his morals not then corrupted as well?”

Mack said the law changes when children are involved.

“The law is incredibly protective of children and there is no use of a child in any kind of sexual activity that can be considered appropriate [or] that can be considered lawful,” she said. “The tough part is, for example, photographs that may be children in provocative poses.”