Oh god of course you see them in public museums. There are a ton of them on exhibit at the BM (which is full of people who aren’t schoolchildren, by the way - when did you last go to a museum?!) My great uncle used to have replicas up on his walls for fun.
You do realise they are FIGURATIVE artworks though? Not images of actual people! Penetration is also not by definition pornographic. Please look up the dictionary definitions of erotic art and pornography. You are conflating the two, and moreover, adding any kind of representation of sex as well. These are not all the same thing.
You’re also conflating other things, too - you mention theatres in Greece, for example. Bawdy Greek drama was crude, but not pornographic. It was funny and coarse, but the parts were played by men and there was no literal pornography involved - Lysistrata for example is full of sexual jokes and innuendo, but it was a staged play, not pornographic at all. Please do go and read the texts you are claiming are pornography. They really aren’t - you are confusing a great many different forms. And who was in the audience for them, do you think?
You’re also making hugely sweeping statements about classical cultures which in reality were very different, and historically varied. Your idea of Greece and Rome makes them sound like a jolly, sexy YouTube video, but in reality they were very different cultures, each spanning many centuries, and the number of people owning or even viewing explicit art was very limited, especially outside the (very tiny) cities. Athens and Rome were not the same, and didn’t represent all of their cultures by any means. And again, some phalloi on a plate kept in a rich man’s villa is nothing like the mass commercial culture of contemporary filmed pornography. It’s also nothing like the coterie cultures of written pornography in, say, Victorian London.
As for your claims on the Neolithic - there’s in fact a huge amount of scholarship on paleolithic and Neolithic artefacts. Large numbers of these are thought to have been made by women, precisely because other similar clay and bone artefacts found in those cultures were often likely to have been made by women - eg. feeding and teething spoons for babies, which sometimes even have the imprint of babies’ teeth still in them.
I don’t really know what to say about your idea that no-one could possibly have ever worshipped the female form. First, it goes completely counter to your ideas about pornography. (There was mass pornography everywhere in everyone’s home, but no-one ever worshipped the female form? Eh?) Second, you don’t think we can know what Neolithic artefacts meant, BUT you can confidently assert that women were always oppressed and so couldn’t have made fertility figurines?!? Women could never possibly have been the figures of veneration in religious art? WTF. This all sounds like schoolboy rubbish from Tumblr so honestly, apart from recommending that you actually read some actual books on and from the cultures you’re taking about, I really am out.