The first thing they list is Feynman "calling women bitches" in the autobiography, but they leave out the context that it's a thought experiment his friend is proposing to him to try to snap him out of being a loser. He psychs himself up to see bar girls as users and bitches and refuses to follow their script which removes him from the patsy role and lets him reexamine the dynamic. He then says that while this works he didn't use those techniques because he found them distasteful and doesn't refer to women in a derogatory way in the rest of his memoirs.
Apparently his most serious offense was not admitting he was a professor when dating. As long as he wasn't dating students in his faculty I don't see why that's inappropriate at all.
They quote his ex-wife saying he flew into violent rages when interrupted and treat it as if he was violent to her, where the report makes it sound like he threw things around.
Flawed, sure. Enough to warrant having some snarky cancel-culture style takedown written about him and dropped in a passive-aggressive way during every semi-related conversation? Doubtful. There's no evidence, or even coherent suggestion, that he hurt people let alone enjoyed doing so.
If you are too young to have known and talked to someone from the World War 2 generation, you can't know that literally every man in the United States would be cancelled from that generation if judged on modern standards.
Most of the women would be cancelled too though.
The generation before that? Forget sleeping with students, they were perfectly fine with children working long hours in dangerous factories and coal mines.
A person with a brain would almost conclude that society changes and progresses over time. Who would have thought?
Gell-Mann has said that Feynman didn't think there was enough evidence for washing your hands after taking a piss.
That level of skepticism is so endearing to me. I think of myself as highly skeptical but that is another level.