You're not understanding what I'm trying to say. This ideology attacks the very idea that the conceptualization of things is bound to reality, ad-hoc, to justify fetishes, making money or other limited personal gains. Outside of these limited gains, these people must deal with reality, so they reintroduce concepts as if nothing happened. That's why it's ad-hoc. It's hypocritical, anti-truth and illogical. Your example, just like other attempts to dismantle the idea of a sex binary (male and female) is fundamentally flawed. A "spork" has the function of being compact and easy to carry & distribute. Being an intersex person has no benefit, it's a disability. It's like being born blind or deaf. It's unfortunate, and should not be fetishized or compared to being a transexual. It's also highly uncommon to be intersex, so uncommon that redoing how society functions is simply too impractical. Introducing sporks has no such burden on society, and can be easily referred to in terms of a spoon and a fork, because it combines the function of both (albeit lackingly).

It doesn't end there. They claim that there is a spectrum, not 3 sexes. So they further muddy the waters, and any attempt to categorize things can be waved away in a similar fashion to satisfy some people's personal whims and desires. Not practical, not acceptable.

Whatever grievances we have with clothing designers or fashion, the point still stands that we will never move away from naturally putting things into boxes, especially when it comes to sex. We naturally see two sexes, and doing so turns out to be what is most in line with reality.