My reading of the critique is that the criteria was unevenly applied. Decompression vulnerabilities exist in both libraries. They rejected one on the basis that it expanded the attack surface area, but accepted the other, despite similar claims applying to it as well.
It's pretty far from the "yet you participate in society" anti-pattern.
They thought one was worth it and the other was not. That’s only similar if you ignore the concept of tradeoffs being different.