Historian’s curse: seeing someone on your reading lists take a “it turns out that the past wasn’t as rigidly and universally eugenicist/racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever as certain parts of society would like to paint it, and that people navigated complex webs of emotion, empathy, necessity, brutality, violence and toxic cultural beliefs in complex ways that should be engaged with to get a nuanced picture of the past” … 

 … and goes to “so mediaeval women weren’t brutally discriminated against and marginalized!” or “so race/ethnic prejudice and hatred didn’t EXIST in the Roman Empire!” or “same-sex behaviours were definitely not suppressed at any point before, like, the Victorians!” or “people in the past DEFINITELY always loved and cared for and were kind to their disabled kids most of the time!” 

And the biggest thing is that not only will correcting it make you an annoying pedant, not only will you then be accused of being [whatever-ist], not only will you be the obnoxious one here, but also finding, digging out and citing all the sources will depress the shit out of you, probably trigger the shit out of you, and basically nobody wins.