It’s a comedy children’s book from an author who liberally applies absurdism. And he and the book are products of the prevailing views of society of the time. Also with nontrivially different demographics.

Among those different views, are included different attitudes about emotional safety(ism), propriety, politeness and so on.

Yes, it’s quite subjective and context-bound. Being intellectually reactionary, being uncharitable, applying stipulative 2020 norms to 1950s work... these are all analytic missteps.