>doesn't deserve an audience

Why do you get to make that determination?

I can see the author's perspective. You don't have to agree with everything you read for it to "deserve an audience."

You are making the determination by declaring that this article is intolerant.

It's a woman's opinion about how language is changing in ways she disagrees with. It isn't her advocating for hatred or violence.

> It isn't her advocating for hatred

Are you sure about this specifically? Her own subtitle disagrees: "I have no patience left for gender activists who pretend that men can give birth."

I struggle to understand what "no patience left" for [population] means other than human intolerance, which goes hand in hand with hatred.

If you read that article and came away with the idea that you should hate or be violent towards trans people, then you are searching for hatred where it doesn't exist.

A woman expressing her opinion that "chest-feeding" and "birthing persons" are terms obnoxious to her is not hatred.

The words "many" and "plenty" are sure doing a lot of work here, what with the complete lack of citations.