[flagged]
You're not only ignoring the link, but you're going out of your way to write up an irrelevant sanctimonious comment.
Then it dips its toe into the pool of accuracy and mentions he never actually said anything cruel (or wrote).
Never once in the article is it suggested we should think unkindly of Da Vinci. From the very first paragraph onward, the article is sympathetic to him. You wanted to be offended and wanted to read into the article that this was something akin to Da Vinci being cancelled or criticized according to modern norms, but that's literally the opposite of what is written.
What part of this article reads as discrediting or decoupling?