I'm not claiming that the "dominance behavior" frame is "wrong" per se: I acknowledge that people in positions of authority or who have a positive social credit

I'm not claiming that the "dominance behavior" frame is "wrong" per se: I acknowledge that people in positions of authority or who have a positive social credit balance can get away with behaviors that others can't. That's a fact of life. The trouble is that the article is worse than wrong: it's unnecessary and divisive. It promotes a worldview based on hostility and resentment by emphasizing worst-case explanations and ignoring benevolent ones. It encourages the reader to twist his or her worldview into one that jumps immediately to evil when looking at the world. That's what makes it an awful piece of writing.