Hmmm. This is, and will always be, a tricky one. It's difficult to call out or cancel someone that has been dead for over 100 years. Yes, a lot of the art depicted involves some incredibly nasty stereotypes and we should be cognizant of that. I was not aware of his history before today, nor did I try to uncover these dark truths. He definitely did some reprehensible things.
That being said though, no, I don't think he should be cancelled. I don't think they should re-word any exhibits, or hide anything, or fail to show it because of the creator might have been a shitty person. I am not against running an entire exhibit dedicated to him in the year 2019. I do not believe that a museum showcasing artwork from the 1800's is in any way a tacit approval of Gauguin's behaviour, nor an insult to present victims.
An exception I would make is if maybe an art show was being put on to advance an agenda. For example, if it was being organized by a cohort of Jeffrey Epstein fans. Or if the implication was DIRECTLY pedophilia is entertaining, colonialism is entertaining (not in an ironic Doug Stanhope sense). This isn't happening. The point is to showcase art that has historical significance, that was part of a movement. I can appreciate the urge not to "throw" people like him into public view, but Christ fam, human history is a fucking nightmare. Anyone who thinks the exhibition is a tacit approval of him as a person is crazy, I think. In the same way seeing John A. Macdonald's shit in a museum as a kid was fine for me. Or Hitler's car with the bullet holes, or whatever.
People should be able to display whatever t.f. they want, no matter how nasty its origin.
To answer the question, negative.