By that logic anyone disagreeing with a comment is guilty of some "nth level of negativity porn".
He admits to not being able to be a good father to his son. No one mentioned bills and groceries - that is not what raising a teenager entails - that's something you added to fit your narrative. It's a simple, specific criticism that is half addressed in the film and for some people not sufficiently resolved.
It's hardly assuming the worst about him.
OP doesn't even say it was the case, and that "I highly doubt that’s what actually happened" - but that this was the impression he got from the movie. Hence it's neither aspersion nor "god of the gaps" - unless theists commonly argue that they also highly doubt god exists?
So, Can I downvote you for assuming the worst about OP? Or for casting aspersion about HN and its "-ism"s?
I literally said that it's likely untrue in reality but that that's how it's depicted in the documentary. It opens with a guy being so burned out that he abandons being a father to his son and goes swimming every day and how much he loves swimming in the ocean and how awesome that is for him. That's a narrative, editing decision that baffled me!
It's HN's god of the gaps. Except god, it's some awful, unredeemable character trait that someone else must have that explains the bit that we see.
Let's even assume for a second you're right. He saddled his wife with everything while he stalked a common octopus. Now let's assume he's honest in the movie and he indeed came to understand his place in life and became a better dad and husband than he would have ever been. So what?
Someone in this thread calls the movie "wealthy adventure porn", but this thread is aspersion porn. Just like if I decided to lambast you for spending your precious time on this earth judging some guy from the HN comment section instead of being the man that you and your family deserve (to be clear, I think such a judgement is ridiculous).