Well (1) this is not inherent to all functional programming, and (2) the joke appears to imply that code written in FP will be more verbose with less content, which is surely not the case. (And also (3) I'm guessing you meant "statically typed" instead of "strongly typed", since the latter is poorly defined and not generally the subject of discussion among functional programmers that I've interacted with.)

I also have met quite a few people who are into category theory, and none of them have made any claim about holding "the one and only valid functional programming viewpoint". But the people I talk to are genuine academic researchers and not armchair academicians, so perhaps there's a difference there.

As for the category theory zealots I have found at work or at conferences, none of them were academics, but rather what I would describe as clueless narcissists overdosed on FP Kool-aid.

When you say "conferences", do you mean academic conferences or industry/language-specific conferences?

I found that there were plenty of people deep into category theory at ICFP this year (an academic conference), but most of them had very reasonable perspectives on the utility of CT and things to that effect.