DC has done some good things within their former "Universe" regarding gay themes, inclusiveness, & visibility.
We've seen gay heroes (Obsidian, Estrano, Starman Mikaal, Batwoman), gay supporting cast (Superman, GL, Flash, WW), even gay villains (Pied Piper, Cavalier & Capt. Stingaree).
Aside from Denny O'Neil's rather heavy-handed & stereotypical depiction of the Joker as fey in a few '70s stories, these depictions were story-driven. If elements were added to lesser, established or supporting characters, it was done in an unsensational way.
I don't advocate DC messing about, any more than they already do, with classic established characters: Not Robin, not Aquaman, not Jimmy Olsen. It's disrespectful to fans & creators.
I'm not suddenly going to embrace a character because of their orientation--it wil depend on the writing & context. If DC wants to take an established supporting character & "make them gay," it will only be successful--as it has been with Obsidian & Piper--if written well.
This media statement by DC is sensationalistic marketing IMO: At worst, it is cashing in; at best, it is too little, too late, and a disservice to classic creations.
The "alter-ego" of superheroes can be seen as a type of closet--super-hero comics could explore this duality one step further by having a gay hero who is closeted & acts out as a hero, or even vice-verse. This was explored satirically in Veitch's Brat Pack.
But to do it glibly, to pander, to distort the core of an iconic character, is not only a disservice to gay fans, but to all fans.
WANTED: RM Robin & P. Parker heads; Batman "waffle" gloves; mint Wolfman tights; Knights', Merry Men, Conan, & Dale Arden swords; Lion Rock (pale) Dracula head;T1 GGoblin body (in good shape but can restring); POTA Soldier Ape minty bandolier; yellow bridle & stirrups; POTA Stallion complete set of tack; Fighting Furies Spanish & Buccaneer outfits & boxed Hook.