youre asking a company to cater to the 10% out there while alienating the rest of the 90%

If somebody feels "alienated" by a gay character simply for existing, that's called fucking homophobia, and I'd like to think homophobes don't make up a sizable market and that game creators aren't expressly interested in catering to homophobia. The majority of straight gamers aren't going to give a shit or even be pleased by it. /r/masseffect for example was very supportive of posts criticizing the M/M romances and even the Hainly Abrams fiasco after the game came out, and that's a pretty hetero male dominated sub.

I mean there is a reason bra companies dont target men in their ads because very few men wear bras

Well this is a false equivalence if I ever heard one. Bras being marketed towards women is totally incomparable to games being marketed to straight dudes because bras are literally made for female anatomy, so unless playing video games literally requires having a dick and liking pussy, that's just stupid. Games are like every other form of entertainment and media and they can be marketed towards and consumed by literally anyone.

Inclusion for the sake of inclusion isn't progress

Okay this is like my number one pet peeve whenever discussions about minority characters in video games get brought up. Until we reach a point where gay characters or female characters or whatever are so common in a video game that it can be incidental developers have to make a conscious effort to put those kinds of characters in their games because they think diversity and inclusiveness is important. "Inclusion for the sake of inclusion" is literally a necessary stepping stone to get to the point where diverse characters can exist in video games and it's no big deal. And how is "inclusion for the sake of inclusion" a bad thing? I mean, it involves someone saying "hey, you know it might be nice to give underrepresented people some characters they can identify with in a game". I think that's a pretty admirable and moral goal.