When I was a kid in the 1990s, like 13/14, I started reading a Piers Anthony book one of my peers really recommended (he had terrible taste, that guy liked the Prism Pentad, so I shouldn't have listened), and like, I don't want to be humblebragging about my creep detection or whatever (but it has saved me a few times lol, including from JKR and MZB), I don't think it's 100% or anything, but jesus wept, the BAD VIBES I got off that caused me to just stop reading it and give it back like 20-30% of the way through. It just felt like reading the diary of a serial killer or similar to me (with hindsight, at the time I was just like "Wow this is weird and I don't like it and it sucks"). I don't even know which one it was, because my mind just slid off it like it was covered in an unidentifiable but clearly slippery and unsanitary substance!
Like, it was more immediate creep-factor than Terry Goodkind years later, which really, is saying something! At least I managed to finish Wizard's First Rule before literally attempting to throw it out the window (and missing, but I did bin it, which I had never done to a book before).
So what's my point? That I'm not sure he'd have stood any kind scrutiny at any time, he just largely avoided scrutiny because, ironically of the degree to which fantasy was sneered at by more serious critics in the time he was writing, and the way in the SF/F community of that era, authors having weird and perhaps objectively bad predilections was seen as something not appropriate to comment on (and if, like me, you did anyway, people acted like you were the weird one for noticing it, which I now consider a pretty big red flag).