I like Bem's article for its flaws. Retracting it seems insincere, as if we're claiming his decisions were widely considered unethical at the time. Quoting his candid statement about how he likes rigor, but isn't interested in it for itself, just feels mean. We shouldn't disincentivize candid discussions of methodology in such a way.

Bem's article should not be retracted. If anything, it should be reprinted annually, as a monument to our mistakes that others may dissect in the future. Actually, my first thought on seeing the headline was a burst of insight that this is bizarrely analogous to the Confederate statues debate (though there I take the opposite position).