I agree. I don't know whether it's carelessness, poor writing skill, or what, but when basic information is incorrect, it's hard to progress to moral or ethical analysis.
One example is that many people think it's cute to use the pronoun "it" regarding a person who claims "transgender" or some other variant. It's not cute: it's false. The person is a "he" or "she," and it never changes, from conception to death.
I have also noticed, most recently in articles about the James Younger situation in Texas, that there is an emphasis on genitalia as the critical factor in maleness or femaleness. That is also false. Every single cell of the body is marked with XX or XY that determines one's sex.
Actually, there are exceptions: XXY (Klinefelders syndrome, also XXYY, XXXYY, XXXY, etc.), X (Turner’s Syndrome), XYY (males some say are more prone to violence and criminality), XY women (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) and XX males (in which a particular DNA sequence normally found on a Y chromosome is found on one or both of the X’s).
In other words, these people are true transgenders, who are ultimately being effectively mocked and belittled by the current trans fanaticism.
Where are the articles?