I don't have any answers but here's my perspective, for what it's worth.
I personally don't care about people's sexual orientation and so long as nobody's getting coerced or harmed then what folk get up to is nothing to do with me. That's kinda' my default position on just about everything, tbh. When it comes to media, however, my feelings are a bit more complicated. I'm not a big fan of soppy love scenes of any persuasion but they are necessary sometimes in the context of the plot. A good love scene informs on the characters and situation, a bad one hangs signs around the characters' necks proclaiming labels like STRAIGHT! LESBIAN! GAY! BI! I detest those scenes because it feels like somebody's trying to force me to recognise something I'm really not interested in, to accept something I already accept. It's annoying, and probably more annoying still to people who think differently. I do, however, recognise the need for people of all orientations to be accepted - with my previous caveat, ideally - and that it's part of the media's role to facilitate this acceptance. Some attempts will be perfect, some will be cringeworthy and some will be exploitative, but most will be just clumsy.
I don't think that soppy love scenes are always necessary, either. Lots of media don't use them, relying on the story itself to get across everything the audience needs to know. This is an imperfect example obviously, but lots of films, especially old films, eschew soppy love scenes for intimate character moments and dialogue. Granted, in those more solidly heterosexual times, even soppy love scenes had little to do in respect of establishing a character's orientation because there were only two: straight and deviant. Nowadays, of course, it's gloriously diverse - and I think this might be a large part of the problem.
Maybe, and as I say I really have no solutions or even an understanding of what other people go through in this regard, it might be an idea to simplify things again, this time to loving and hateful. The subject doesn't have to be forced or signposted, just written as normal. Imagine a parallel world where the orientations of people had ceased to matter; would Casablanca still be a great film if Rick was Nikki and there were no other changes than that one name in the script? Would Raiders of the Lost Ark still be a great film with no other change than Henry Jones Junior becoming Henrietta Jones Junior? Or Marion becoming Mario? I like to think they'd still be classics, that I'd still love them, and that they'd convey the characters' orientations as effortlessly as the versions in our world convey heterosexuality without hanging big neon signs everywhere. (Tarzan might be a bit more problematic - just how did old Greystoke deal with puberty and young adulthood until Jane came along? And what if Jane had been John?)
I know, I know, this is a simplistic view but I'm a simplistic fellow and I guess it doesn't advance the discussion very much beyond pointing out what everybody probably already knows anyway - it's the love that's important, not the form it takes.
