For context, this is the _entirety_ of the portion of the article which critiques Feynman's behavior towards women. It's not even 1/5 of the article. "In high

For context, this is the _entirety_ of the portion of the article which critiques Feynman's behavior towards women. It's not even 1/5 of the article. "In high school, though Feynman excelled in academics, he began to foster insecurities around masculinity. Later in life this would curdle into juvenile braggadocio and poisonous attitudes towards women, with him making degrading remarks about those he met, and which persisted throughout his life. Such behavior is chronicled in a notorious chapter of his autobiography, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman! (“I adopted the attitude that those bar girls are all bitches, that they aren’t worth anything, and all they’re in there for is to get you to buy them a drink, and they’re not going to give you a goddamn thing”). Yet, this markedly contrasted with his unwavering respect for the many talented women he supported: starting with his sister and including his first wife Arline. He was impressed and influenced by Arline’s skills as an artist and music teacher. The marriage ended tragically early when Arline died of tuberculosis. Years later, Feynman leant valuable support to the Blake scholar Jenijoy La Belle, the first female faculty appointment at Caltech, who had been denied tenure. One of the few professors outside of the humanities who came to her defence, he published an influential letter of support in the campus newspaper, and thanks in part to this, she received tenure and enjoyed a long career." I'm confused. The article is 90% about his career as a scientist, and is nothing but laudatory. 10%, if that, is about his relationships with women, and even the critique given there is tempered w/the observation that he had a strong and loving relationship with his wife. So, how is this a hatchet job? Reads more like a normal biographical article. What exactly is your critique here?