Right. I mean, basically, the false premise of that argument is that it rests upon the notion that Disney was in the right in choosing to adapt that story to begin with. If they weren't willing to present a depiction of Pocahontas's life which was faithful to historical fact, why do it at all? They could have chosen any other number of harmless fairy tales (I mean, sure, Cinderella and Snow White were both desensitized for the sake of the audience, but they're already imaginary so who really cares?), but this was a matter of an actual person who went through a great deal of trauma, and it trivializes that fact to turn her into some sing-along Disney princess. It's like if they chose to put the story of an African slave to music and removed the most explicit depictions of the horrors a slave would be put through because it has to be "child friendly"; in the first place, it isn't a sensible premise for Disney to work with if they're aiming for a family film, and it would do great injustice to the memory of people who actually lived it, as well as their living descendents.