The problem here is not advertising metrics, though these may be exacerbating externalities.
The likes of people who write essays on subjects like the sexism of spooning are operating from a consistent worldview ground in critical theory and postmodern feminism, which analyze all human relations through the purview of identity, and reaffirm the sanctity of identity politics. These self-destructive memes that shoehorn humanity into repressive categories and labels under the false pretense of deconstructing and delegitimizing them (in fact, they only protract them and render people subservient to their expectations, just as intended) have also largely destroyed the feminist movement starting at the second half of the second wave, which has over the past few years seen an enormous renaissance.
Where many feminists will claim to be concerned with equity, they in fact operate under a complex framework of gender and intersectionality with results anathema to any actual equity or egalitarianism. Why is it the likes of Christina Hoff Sommers, Wendy McIlroy and Camille Paglia - some of the last classical feminists concerned with equality are so frequently derided as "anti-feminists"? Because the movement has long went past any notions of it.
Are you sure you're addressing the same question as the article? You seem to be asking why these are written, while the article is asking why they are published by the institutions they are.
Intersectionality is a theory where different categories of discrimination (race, gender, sex, ability, orientation, etc.) are analyzed as having differing implications on oppression depending on how they cluster, and that moreover they are interrelated to more fundamental power structures, or dependent on each other.
In practice, it is used either as a naive adder (if being black carries disadvantages over being white and being a woman carries disadvantages over being a man, then it is reasoned being a black woman is even worse than being a black man - ignoring that stereotypes, incarceration rates and racially motivated violence have largely been skewed to the latter), or as a carte blanche to blame all forms of oppression on patriarchy.
I always saw it as more of a political strategy, with the goal of taking disparate identity groups and aligning them together into/under a single political umbrella.
An individual has multiple identities. These identities shape how you interact with others and how others interact with you. That is the concept intersectionality captures.
Edit: I appreciate your asking. It's a valid question.
The likes of people who write essays on subjects like the sexism of spooning are operating from a consistent worldview ground in critical theory and postmodern feminism, which analyze all human relations through the purview of identity, and reaffirm the sanctity of identity politics. These self-destructive memes that shoehorn humanity into repressive categories and labels under the false pretense of deconstructing and delegitimizing them (in fact, they only protract them and render people subservient to their expectations, just as intended) have also largely destroyed the feminist movement starting at the second half of the second wave, which has over the past few years seen an enormous renaissance.
Where many feminists will claim to be concerned with equity, they in fact operate under a complex framework of gender and intersectionality with results anathema to any actual equity or egalitarianism. Why is it the likes of Christina Hoff Sommers, Wendy McIlroy and Camille Paglia - some of the last classical feminists concerned with equality are so frequently derided as "anti-feminists"? Because the movement has long went past any notions of it.