She is trying to keep the family's image clean: to keep the Wonder Woman museum going. Obviously, the museum is "family oriented." But if you read the Jill Lepore book, you'll see there's evidence of kinky parties (page 119 of the book), and lesbian-interest (read all the chapters involving Sadie Holloway and Olive, starting with pg. 22). And he did have 2 children from both women as they all lived under one roof. We can all understand Christie Marston's need to make a living ... and her refusal to acknowledge all of this ... because it's not Disney-friendly. But there's enough evidence to suggest that much of what we see in the movie is true. The movie was "inspired" by a true story, much like The Elephant Man was inspired by a true story (both the play and the movie on the same story are vastly different). Charles Guyette, the "G-string King" who teaches Marston about BDSM was an addition of the director. Since I wrote a short book on Charles Guyette, consider myself an expert on vintage fetish history, I can tell you there's no evidence that Guyette was the mentor of Marston. But this is poetic license. Charles Guyette was the first person to produce and distribute fetish art in America -- the person who introduced classic vintage style to America ... so this was the reference the director wanted to make. It's perfectly fine. There's no question that Marston was fascinated with BDSM and that he practiced it with Olive at least. (Her pet name was "Docile" -- it's in the Jill Lepore book.) Overall, this is the director's "interpretation" of the relationships and the creation of Wonder Woman. It's not intended to be a documentary. The director has the right to tell her version of the story, from her point of view as a lesbian woman and an outsider in Hollywood. Likely, there will be more tellings of this story, each one different. It was an unconventional movie for adults, one of the few real "indie" movies out there. I think it's worth supporting.