Not in the U.S., federally at least, where the justice department's guidance specifies that CP is media which "appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor."
https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-fede...
Also wouldn't that logic apply to pictures that were originally taken openly and innocently?
But "sexual abuse" is a specific thing, and socially attacking someone with revenge porn is not at all "sexual abuse".
It's a different category, just like punching someone in the face is a different category.
>The practice has also been described as a form of psychological abuse and domestic violence, as well as a form of sexual abuse.
This does lead to poor policing (like the famous Google banning man for taking photo of his child's genitals to send to doctor story).
It appears that in present-day English people use the word 'abuse' to mean more than physical abuse. If you're a prescriptivist that may upset you, but isn't that the nature of being a prescriptivist? Does it perhaps beg the question "why be a prescriptivist?"? Aren't you, perhaps, literally standing against the world?
Yeah, I went there... You're trivialising real sexual abuse.