NullVector

Why? I don't mind doing it, but I'd like to know the reason you asked...

Pronouns aren't inherently tied to gender. Nonbinary people can and do use he/him and she/her.

Okay, I've got two issues with that reason:

1. I'm not convinced that your first sentence is factually correct for the specific case of English language third person singular pronouns (which is what we're discussing here)
2. I disagree with the implication that your first sentence logically follows from your second sentence.

For point 1: as far as i can gather, he/him pronouns are classified by linguists as 3rd person masculine singular. Like here, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_personal_pronouns i.e they are taken as inherently tied to gender (male gender, in this case) and that assumption is built into the structure of the language (so, English language just assumes a male/female gender binary exists, as I understand it). So me putting 'male ones' on my profile as shorthand for he/him/his/himself pronouns seems consistent with the standard category names linguists have adopted for English pronouns.

For point 2: non-binary identifying people might indeed choose to use he/him (or she/her) pronouns to refer to themselves; but that doesn't alter whether or not the English language (and the majority of the people that speak it), by assumption, map these pronouns to a specific gender identity. If yes, then I guess that leaves any person identifying as non-binary with a choice - they can either accept and use the standard pronouns and everything they're taken to imply (most likely with some misgivings). Or, they can refuse to use these terms at all and seek to encourage change to the basic structures and assumptions of the language itself - with adoption of new pronouns for example (and perhaps other related changes). 

It's unfortunate and I don't know what the best option is here. But, in a sense, it's just one example of the sorts of issues that come up all the time around socialisation; we have to compromise on various aspects of our individual identities and thought processes to be able to participate in society and communicate with others. I mean, a person identifying as 'Buddhist' might find a linguistic convention like "my body" similarly problematic - it implies a separate notion of "me", a separate notion of "body" and a relationship of ownership between them (with the "me/my" owning the "body"). Considering that it leads to all sorts of erroneous assumptions and thought processes, they might wish to invent a new language, free by design of these sorts of assumptions, and encourage other people to adopt it. But, this seems unlikely to happen. So, they may instead adopt the common linguistic conventions whilst simultaneously being aware that what they are taken to imply by most people is not actually true or (perhaps more importantly) helpful. Maybe non-binary people are in a position somewhat like that? English spelling is another (more trivial, perhaps) example. It's non-phonetic and this causes all sorts of issues for children trying to learn to read. But what to do about it? You've got a subtle kind of 'legacy code' problem to solve there.

I'm not being intentionally stubborn. I'm very much open to changing my mind on this. If you (or anyone else on here) can give me additional reasons then I'll definitely think about them. But I'll leave my profile it as it is for now.