Ugh. I’m sick to death of this way of thinking. Artists are not in the exclusive business of documenting their own communities, sexual practices, whatever. Mapplethorpe, as well as every other half-decent artist out there, did other things too.

The basic point is not getting across. I’ll take a (probably futile stab at it.) Criticism is fine, both private and public. Intimidation is not fine. Protests and boycotts are intimidation.

Lets make it REAL simple. Boycotts and protests are intimidation. Trying to intimidate a gallery, its patrons or the artist on display is censorship. It was worse in the Mapplethorpe situation but the underlying idea is the same.

So you are saying speech is only free if it comes from a specific perspective? That seems like a pretty slippery slope.

This situation is pretty simple really. Somebody wants to display something. Other people want to see it. Nobody has a right to interfere with that process.