what defines pornography is that it really is politics?

what defines it for legal purposes, sure, i think so.  beyond that my favourite sarcastic definition is:  Sexually oriented material that is not considered acceptable to the viewer; the same material when judged subjectively acceptable is often referred to as "erotica".  because that's my impression of the majority opinion after decades of listening to these types of discussions.  and those people vote for the politicians who make the law.  heck, we only have the term pornography to discuss today because in the 19th century some people in power decided that sex was bad for the masses, it sapped their precious energy which was needed to make the new industrial society run run run.  anything that distracted from that was dangerous.  and what better way to control people than to control their most primal drives?  i think gore vidal hit the nail on the head when he said "sex is politics".

Phantast, judging by intent doesn't work for me at all -- because first and foremost it requires access to the artist.  that's right out.  unless if we had access to all artists everywhere, and could raise the dead for this purpose, and assure all artists of safety from prosecution, and invented the perfect truth serum that can not only detect lies but also when people fool themselves, and give everyone the power of erudition, we would still require some external validation of that intent.  until then the jury will remain out.

and the US legal code's definition of obscenity fails for me as well because it can't stand on its own -- somebody has to be elevated to over the rest of us judge what's literally, artistically, politically, or scientifically valuable.  and those values change as society changes.  so at best we have a definition that relies on subjective criteria, "community standards", and an "average person". that definition is intrinsically bound to its time, place, and culture (as momodot so aptly pointed out with remarks about that ethnic/religious group).

i don't mind elevating experts to judge when it comes to relatively clearly measurable factors -- the FDA is a good idea (though there too one can easily see how experts might fail when the factors become complex).  i do mind it a lot when it comes to what i may or may not look at, or share with my friends, or do with my own body.  the repression of sexual imagery really bugs me because it vilifies a basic human need.

on a tangent, has anyone else noticed how the word "porn" has been taken over by some people to use in non-sexual contexts, to indicate some form of sensually loaded consumption?  there is a "food porn" community on livejournal, for example, where people talk and share pictures about great meals.