I disagree. Two of the nominees for Best Director are openly gay. If we accept the 10% guideline, there must be 20 people nominated in that category, with 2 of them being gay. How about Best Actress? Two of the characters are gay. Are there 10 nominees in this category (10 actors + 10 characters = 20 people, 10% of 20 gives us Nicole Kidman and Selma Hayek).
Look at the numbers, far more than 10% of these major people are gay. And if one accepts the more standard 2% estimate, then you can see that gays are FAR more represented in the Big Names than in the general population.
Again, it's rare in any random data set that you'll get a perfect match with expect ratios. Roll a ten-sided dice ten times and see how normal your results look. 2 out of 10 is not outside of standard deviation. 2 out of 5 isn't even.
But even on that, what about Best Actor? Looks like a strikeout there. What about all of the other categories not even mentioned here? What about all of the other people who worked on the movies mentioned (directors, writers, choreographers, technicians, voice-overs, key grips, coffee boys...)? Getting worked up over a data point is not rational, it's paranoid. And again, I say this is someone who despises Hollywood's leftist slant (I'm still fuming over the butchering of the American Revolution they called "The Patriot").
Look at the numbers, far more than 10% of these major people are gay. And if one accepts the more standard 2% estimate, then you can see that gays are FAR more represented in the Big Names than in the general population.
If I'd known 49 straights for every non-straight I've ever known, I think I'd have to rent out a stadium to talk to the whole lot of them.