I was also under the same impression, but it seems to have grown less clear?
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2025/09/15/tyler-robinsons-groyper-connection-truth-or-conspiracy-theory/
In any case, Kirk enjoyers have never been known to let facts get in the way of their hate
Another way to look at it is "one can't fuck children, because fucking implies consent so you should use the appropriate term which is rape", which is what I believe they meant.
Merci pour Le fact-check
At a glance it even looks like an AI wrote the whole thing, doesn't it?
EDIT: 3 posts in history, all with the same hollow Green LinkedIn vibe...
"Une graine dans le bocal piment" ?
Actually 157 out of 192 UN countries recognize the state of Palestine right now. When Crimea was invaded by Russia in 2014 and Israël had already been occupying parts of it illegaly for over 40 years, the count was 133. As soon as 1994, even before Netanyahu's first tenure, there were more than half (96) UN member states recognizing the state of Palestine.
Most countries absolutely do and have recognized Palestine and the imperialism that goes on there is old as fuck. Yours maybe doesn't, mine only switched this year as a mostly performative act. Source: even a passing glance at wikipedia
I don't know about this Milhouse business, but he did have some very salient points: that time he gushed blood uncontrollably from his neck and died has raised serious doubt in my previously staunch anti-gun disposition. Now I have to manually remind myself that most gun violence victims are unfortunately not Charlie Kirk.
Gender is not "for blurred lines", it's about social constructs, and society happens to be a complex emergent system, so its binaries tend to be approximative at best. The point of separating it was not to deal with blurred lines, but to deal with sociology in an unequivocal manner.
Sex is about biology which is also a complex emergent system. You may assert that sex is binary and immutable in the whole field of biology, and I don't know what your credentials are to support this claim but my sources beg to differ. I've read and heard biologists use different definitions for different subfields and contexts, and argue that none is a simple binary when you start to look at individual expressions. Even your article starts with three qualifiers for sex: "anatomical gonadic and chromosomal", and deals specifically with people who may have none or both gametes. So much for the major scientific win of an immutable binary.
You seem to be decided on one definition having the primacy over the others and I get why: gamete size is basically the first logical step of the male/female differenciation in species, so it makes sense when your study is about reproductive strategies across species and how sexual differenciation is so widespread. I'm not sure it's going to make as much sense when your field of study is embryo morphogenesis or ethology, though.
All the biologists I've met or read are actually fairly used to "sex" meaning different things in different contexts, and they're absolutely going to be fine with people calling themselves intersex if they don't want their biological singularity defined by a disorder.
Also, did you read the part in your own article where they said the nomenclature "DSD" was decided in Chicago when a bunch of doctors thought maybe "hermaphrodite" and "intersex" was maybe pejorative? It's okay to just ask the people who actually have it what they prefer and use that, it's just phonemes, it's fine. No scientific content is removed by being considerate.
The word intersex is used mainly because actual people out there would rather be regarded as sitting on the blurry line between the imperfect categories that our meat computers want to pattern-recognize, rather than "Disorders" of a "binary and immutable" yet somehow very accident-prone nature. I really fail to see what is confusing or misleading with that, just switch your heaviside with a sigmoid, put the quigley scale around 0, you'll be fine.
You should read the "controversy" part at least, your article is interesting
Maybe one of them performed their spell over the dark web, with bitcoin as sacrifice.
"New" in this case means almost literally a permutation of the same people, with two 'additions' from previous failed governments.