Photography and Art are perceived differently at different moments in history. They are also perceived differently by us LL forum members, depending on where we come from, and what our background is.
I remember this album cover from a famous german hard rock band (from the 70's or 80's) my older brother used to have. There was a naked girl/child on the cover. I can't remember questioning this kind of photography back then, but I can understand and accept that this image is perceived differently by others today.
Anybody bought Martin Parr's marvellous "History of the Photobook", where he also talks about a (very liberal 68th style) art/nude photography book that was accepted back then, but not today because of the explicit content that will be misunderstood 40 years later?
Personally, i always try to be on the photography's side, but I also try to understand the other side. But, as much as I welcome discussions about and around art/photography, closing an exhibition is not the way to go. Some years ago, conservative "forces" veiled a public Nana sculpture by Niki de Saint-Phalle in my country because of the explicit curves of the sculptures. There a hundred of examples in other countries where some people try to decide what the public has to contemplate in museums/art galleries and what not.
Where does this stop?