I am interested in the notion that you object to provoking emotion on purpose objectionable.

That conclusion about my general preferences does not follow from my stated specific preferences.

Does this apply to art in general?

Not... in general, no. I do strongly dislike it when authors/directors/etc. provoke emotion in a deliberate attempt to misdirect the reader/viewer/etc. from considering what is going on in the work. That is, when there is an attempt to provoke emotion directly, rather than as a result of seeing/reading/otherwise apprehending the content. I will attempt to provide examples when I think of some.

(On a similar note - do you go to movies or see plays? Do you go ever dim lights for romantic purposes?)

I do go to movies, and even Broadway shows, though not plays, and do on occasion dim lights for romantic purposes (or, to be more precise, locate intended-to-be-romantic activities in locations with suitable light levels... which phrasing makes it sound rather unromantic, I suppose... ah well).

I am mostly just clarifying that you are someone who likes to explore and engage intellectually, but not emotionally

I don't actually think this is a fair characterization. As I said to Kaj_Sotala here, it's the collectivization of emotion, and of the emotion of sacredness in this case, that I object to.

If a group is meeting regularly, doing things you like, does it make your world worse if they start meeting additional times, doing things that you don't like?

Maybe. It depends on the relative extent to which the activites I like and the activities I dislike contribute to the group's identity and cohesiveness.