Anyone who writes fiction so as to speak to the contingent aesthetic standards of a specific spatiotemporal location rather than enduring truths is, in my mind, at worst a propagandist and at best a hack.
Translate, pls?

Am I hiding behind the intentional fallacy to ignore the fact that I am disseminating modes of thought which I find distasteful?
Well, I'd say there's a distinct difference between, on one hand, *depiction* of modes of thought & actions that are reprehensible, and, on the other, *endorsing* such things in the text.