The example profile includes pronouns.
Sooo f*ing tired.
Even pointing this out objectively will get somebody steamrolled.
I find it really interesting what people consider political/apolitical these days, even things that weren't before. If somebody says they like to drink orange juice, that's currently an apolitical statement. If somebody else comes out and says that drinking orange juice is a bad thing to do, and gives a political reason for it, the first person suddenly "becomes political" by virtue of enjoying orange juice and talking about it, even though that wasn't political before. Why should the opinions of dissenters have the power to turn someone's otherwise apolitical statement political?
(Now compare that allegory to somebody who said "Since this is the internet and you cannot see me, please know that I'm a he/him" on a BBS in 1985. That was an apolitical statement. But now, saying it on your social media in 2022 it's political? How come?)
You may be tired, and I may get downvoted, but this is oversimplifying the problem so much that the message itself seems political. First, identifying pronouns is not really opt-in. There is significant peer pressure, and once you're the lone holdout, it's very hard to keep yourself pronoun-less without becoming a social outcast and targeted as a bigot.
I am 100% behind equal rights for trans people, and will call anyone by their preferred pronoun (he or she, on the fence on they, and would probably not go into the neo-pronouns). That said, my wish is that the default mode to address someone is based on observed external sex characteristics, and where people whose external sex characteristics match their traditional pronouns do not communicate their pronouns. My reasons are that at a young age, kids are extremely easy to influence, and I have a strong feeling that many kids identify as another sex to mask other underlying issues. For similar contrarian perspective see the book Irreversible Damage and also Blair White's youtube channel.
(I mean, yes, in the last few years this has been politicised, primarily in the US, by a right wing desperate for a new wedge issue, but you'd have to be fairly gullible to fall for that...)
It's the left wing equivalent of putting up a bunch of burning crosses and pretending they don't mean anything.
I know exactly how fairly I would be treated in that community and it looks like this: (the flagged and dead comment below this)
Are you colorblind and the colors of the text are hard to read? They weren't very readable on light mode but I wouldn't call that political
Is it the mastodon instance? The overall peppy feel of the page?
Is "burning crosses" over-the-top? Yes, obviously. Does it say, "You're not the kind of social we have in mind," to a sizable portion of potential users? Yes again.
It's nice, playful, and youthful branding.
it's bait
by the way, I posted that link sincerely.
I believe you mean, "agree with me on gender and sexuality". When you take away the tendentious wording, it's a lot less clear that it "should be a given."