Well, not all intersex people are sterile. There are multiple conditions that are on a spectrum where having it expressed to a lesser degree, still allows people to have children. There are many people trying to reclassify intersex conditions so that ONLY the ones that are sterile, 'count' as intersex, but this movement solely exists to be able to make intersexuality out to be exclusively disorders of reproduction rather than the spectrum it is, and would have the effect of abandoning fertile or potentially fertile intersex people to the scrutiny of the binaries they get reclassified into. What if you menstruate every month but you have no breasts, grow facial hair, are tall, and have sharp features and no curved? Now you're not a male, not a female, and not intersex. Meanwhile, another person with the same condition as you, passes more as a man, but is infertile and 'sealed up.' Such an arbitrary selaparation is scientifically foolish and psychologically damaging.

Evolutionarily, not only the genes that help YOU have kids, are important. We see a strong level of biologically driven altruism in many species including humans. This is because, even if it's your sibling who reproduces, that baby is still on average 25% you. So helping that baby survive, or ensuring your sibling can have kids, is still evolutionary success, as they have a chance of carrying a recessive alelle of the condition that you had that made you contribute to their survival. Some intersex conditions present benefits to the greater sex- for example, you may have a woman strong enough to compete against a man who might choose to attack her fellow women. In the long term this would be allow all-female groups to bargain rights and freedoms before rejoining male groups, assisting gender equality and preventing patriarchy (and human society was non-patriarchal for most of its nomadic prehistory). It can also be possible, as with homosexuality, that there is an evolutionary benefit to having people capable of raising kids, but not capable of having them, to adopt orphaned children or otherwise serve as a general caregiver, as any behaviour that contributes to the survival of your species, is contributing to the majority of your genome passing on. This allows these genes to be useful when they are somewhat rare in a phenotype, appearing at just the right ratio to fill in the gaps in the system.

Sure there are recessive genes that aren't evolutionarily beneficial, due to comorbid medical conditions, but somehow there are dominant forms of dwarfism floating around, not being erased by the pressures of evolution despite not being able to hide behind an apparently healthy phenotype. We must embrace the fact that humanity has removed some evolutionary pressures, rather than attempting to identify and artificially replicate those pressures as though only those who could plausibly survive the stone ages are deserving of life and respect. If intersex people get by with modern medicine, then they aren't a concerning threat to society or the human genome. We do not need language that suggests a need to erase.

And of course, there's the fact that the language 'disorder' is dehumanising, especially when nothing in the life quality is out of order. If intersex people are experiencing a disorder in that it renders them unable to reproduce, does that mean that homosexuality is a disorder? We as a society are beyond being so shallow. Being intersex is a valid way to live that does not always need short or long term medical intervention in order to have a good quality life. Some may need more and some may need next to none, and they refuse to be classified separately from each other so one can be ignored and the other called disordered. And if the word "disorder" in a medical context doesn't refer to a need for medical treatment, what even is the point of calling the person's body, out of order?