[nullc]

I think it's likely that your understanding of RSA is mostly fake. E.g. You could do some totally insecure 'RSA' on paper, but it would be insecure.

Eventually people will write intuitive explanations of other algorithms (it's fairly easy to do them for sphincs+ and mceliece, for example) and you'll feel you understand them too. (and, in fact, I think those understandings will actually be less dangerous than the RSA ones!)

> with a bit of work I'd expect almost any programmer to be able to implement RSA without too much difficulty.

Implement RSA incorrectly without too much difficulty.

You should be dubious that even world class cryptographers will get it totally right, as many RSA implementations -- even ones written by experts-- have had serious flaws.