Okay you are very quick to define the art as "simulated x". Is it in fact that? I am legitimately asking. I have yet to see evidence of that. It seems like it is reference or suggestive imagery. So again, we are talking about art.

To evaluate legality of an artwork in America you can refer to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test

THIS is where the discussion should be oriented. Nowhere else.

Going back to your points - I was referring to whether ACTUAL people are at risk when I said "vulnerable population". Since there isn't any proof of foul play the discussion defaults to whether you have moral objections to the artwork. Look at figures like Robert Mapplethorpe and the debates the arose there if you're interested.

Now I understand your use of debating ("gotcha" logical fallacies) but it isn't hard to understand what I am saying. She gave her reasoning in plain English. You not accepting it is your opinion.

Again, this isn't about your reaction. This is about connecting her to a greater (unproven) conspiracy and the funneling of users from pizzagate and conspiracy blogs towards her social media platforms. For a source just look all over this sub. This brigading of her content only occurred due to videos captured at Comet Pizza.