Thanks, Simon. It's not just the dance itself but his stated intention to "annoy" the Catholic Church and to do so in order to be scandalous (not to be scandalous for some good societal end) that strikes me as adolescent. But you have explained why he hates the Church, and thanks for doing so.
The thing is yes, on the surface, De Frutos' piece sounds adolescent, but throughout his work, his great work he's really explored the theme of Catholicism in relation to his heritage, he's ARgentinian, sexuality, he's a gay activist and the oppression of women by the Church and he's done so with far greater subtlety and wit - so I'm prepared to give him a free pass.
Is that different from what Fellini did in his films--except that it was more well-crafted and thought out? It's okay to do a pitiful protest against the Catholic Church, although that wouldn't keep the piece from being pitiful. I don't myself care to 'annoy' the Catholic Church, but that could certainly be seen as 'being scandalous for some societal good'. You do not need to have the goal of a 'societal good' always in your scandals, and most people don't. But if he hates the Church, it follows naturally that you do your own expression of the hatred, not what would be more 'seemly'. I don't hate the Catholic Church, as not one, but adoring much of the art that it has produced. But since we always talk of ballet in particular as not having to have any particular ideological, societal, or political goal, so that if there is just some desire to 'be bratty', which this sounds like, that just sounds like part and parcel of the rest of the piece. But I'd think that anybody who just wanted to 'annoy the Catholic Church' would at least think they were doing it for some kind of 'societal good', even if it was just their own idea that they had 'hurt feelings' of psychological hangups from being Catholic. That's cool.. My best friend is always going on about how horrible it was to be brought up Catholic. It's just the piece sounds horrible for all reasons described.
Also, what Simon says sounds like it's a continuation of activist work he's long been involved with, so that this could well prove to be an important part of that whole oeuvre when looking back say in 7-10 years. Lots of artists have what they call 'evil works', which are loathed at the time, and they even often decry them themselves--albeit usually some years later, after the sense of epiphanic euphoria has passed. Lyotard's book 'Libidinal Economy' is almost always considered his greatest work, although it caused enormous protest, and he even repudiated it himself, calling it his 'evil book', but it's one of the best things he ever wrote, all about 'Little Girl Marx', and all phillosophers know it practically by heart.