jno - // Outrageous no doubt but it helped get women the vote. Is a painting more or less important than democracy? //
You have to be careful not to chase your quarry over a cliff.
Clearly a painting is not more important than democracy, but with any freedom comes responsibility.
It is the sort of freedom that enshrines democracy that also allows people the right to enjoy their heritage without it being roped into a political protest.
As far as I am concerned, protest is an enshrined right of a free society, but in the same way that free speech does not allow you falsely to shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre, so protest is not boundless simply because the protestor believes that the rightness of their cause gives them carte blanche to protest in any way they see fit.
Alienating the very people whose support you seek in order to create the change you pursue is counter-productive, and this is a prime example of exactly that.
If you deprive people of the sight of a work of art, they are highly unlikely to see beyond your pointless posturing, and certainly not as far as the essence of the point you are trying to make.
Protest needs to be effective, and on-message - this was neither of those.