No single definition is, well, definitive, but let's keep going and see if they converge on a common theme

This definition of pornography comes from the Collins dictionary published by HarperCollins. Because it uses the word pornography to define itself, it's less of a definition and more of an example. Still, what it gives us is "[a material] designed to cause sexual excitement by showing naked people or referring to sexual acts."; By this "definition", an image of fully naked people can only be pornography if it was designed to cause sexual excitement. Family photo at a nudist colony? Not pornography. Drawing a nude as a character study? Not pornography. If you think the naked body in inherently sexual, THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU. Emphasis on YOU. A partially clothed person not referring to a sexual act, but still intended to cause sexual excitement? NOT PORNOGRAPHY. Pinup art? Beer ads? Basic T&A? NOT PORNOGRAPHY. (That would be an example of what we call "erotica", a term too nuanced for the simple binary crusader mind to comprehend.) By the same token, a depiction of a sexual act NOT intended to cause sexual excitement would also not be pornography according to this "definition". Hey, it's not my definition, I'm just shoving it under the crusader's noses since they can't be bothered to look this shit up themselves, the lazy morons.