Unfortunately (or thanks to Bitcoin non-discrimination), we will have people who want or hope for Bitcoin to be used in certain ways we don't agree with, and they will use whatever feature is available to meet their needs.
So agree with nullius here. I don't see the point of hating on exchanges and Wasabi and expecting them to fall in line with ideologies they're legally bound to go against.
There will always be services which do not respect privacy in the slightest. Centralized exchanges are the obvious one. All custodial wallets or web wallets are another example. However, these services do not pretend to respect your privacy, and they certainly do not market themselves as privacy enhancing. This is the difference with Wasabi. For Wasabi to market themselves as literally the only solution for bitcoin fungibility and the only wallet which is capable of providing privacy, while actively cooperating with blockchain analysis, is at best utterly dishonest and more likely actively malicious.
Legal tender laws make this easy, you have a right to have your bills accepted atleast at some point. But even fiat bills are not perfectly fungible despite being legal tender, higher bills don’t get accepted everywhere and cash can get refused by businesses, if there’s proper warnings in place beforehand(also depending one where you live).
That's different though. A business which refuses higher bills would quite happily accept that money if you first split your €500 in to 10x €50 bills, whereas (presumably) a business refusing a tainted output would still refuse that same output if you split it in to 10 smaller outputs first. Similarly, a business can refuse cash in the same way a business can refuse bitcoin altogether and I'm not going to complain about fungibility. In these cases the business is discriminating against the money itself, not making certain parts of that money non fungible.