State Pioneer is certainly a step in the right direction. It helps point out the difference between Pioneer (noun), pioneer (adjective), and pioneer (verb).
The Pioneer (noun) was used widely in the 1800s to describe military and civilian construction engineers, who would enter an undeveloped area to pave the way for others to follow. These people usually walked or traveled by horse, and their main tools were a gun and an axe. They built log cabins and stone buildings and drew their sustenance from the land.
You are correct that other emigrants were also pioneers in the sense of pursuing new trades, and new resources. In this case, they were emigrants who engaged in pioneering actions and behaviors. They were exploring something new, and were among the first to do so in their particular field. They didn't consider themselves as pioneers, but we do while looking in hindsight.
The use of the word "pioneer" is part of the language that was handed down to us, it is not something that I hope to establish as something new. The historical writers from the 1800s made these distinctions.
Especially in regards to where genealogy meets history, such as in the popular County History books throughout the US, ancestors who settled an area before it became a State, were singled out as Pioneers. The early historians from throughout the US understood the dangers faced by the early settlers (their parents and grandparents), and the skills and fortitude they required to survive and prosper. It is these historians who tell us what our ancestors considered to be Pioneers. This is not my definition.
People, today, have no direct knowledge of what a Pioneer was. Some people take the time to visit pioneer reenactment villages, read older historical accounts of Pioneers, and investigate the details of their life, but that knowledge does not include the actual experience of the hardships, and the skills, and the endurance that was required to survive. This knowledge will continue to fade from our awareness if we do not make an effort to keep these ideas sharply focused in our historical records.
Wikitree is a historical record, and we should endeavor to keep each aspect of the historical record as clear and sharp as we can, so that new generations can appreciate the older generations as they were in their own periods. (I believe it serves the public interest to also include all the dark and dirty "secrets" that we uncover.)
This is why I support your use of the word, "invaders." There can be no doubt that from the perspective of Native Americans, the Europeans were invaders. It is a legitimate perspective of the Europeans (who also happen to be my ancestors). We want Wikitree to reveal the total truth of the past, and not just a one-sided propaganda blurb.
If the word, "Pioneer," was actually used by your Dutch ancestors, then yes, they should be considered as Pioneers. However, I do not believe it was the nomenclature of the period for describing your ancestor's part in the world. Do you see what I am saying here? Our terms on Wikitree should reflect the vocabulary of the people in our profiles during the period in which they lived. Otherwise, we are rewriting history.
The Southern Pioneers Project on Wikitree is populated mostly by ancestor profiles who were not actual Pioneers. Anybody who uses that category for learning about Pioneers is going to be misled as to what it meant to be a Pioneer in those states during the true Pioneer periods.