Honestly, I think the problem for many is that they simply don't engage in fantasy role-play with the intent of pursuing (or having catered to) a particular political or social agenda. I have nothing against gay couples - I don't want issues like abortion or gun control in my campaigns either. The idea of one NPC selling a family heirloom so that another NPC can have a sex-change operation might seem romantic or noble, but there is absolutely nothing about it that says 'fantasy adventure' to me.

I get that Paizo is a progressive-minded company and that's laudable, and I get that these kinds of discussions are a deliberate driving force behind these kinds of NPC's - above and beyond simple inclusion, they 'raise awareness' - but its my position (admittedly no more valid than anyone else's) that they should reflect those beliefs in their hiring practices and in their work environment, which I'm certain that they do, and focus more on crafting superb fantasy adventures than pushing social agendas. Reign of Winter, Wrath of the Righteous and now Mummy's Mask - Paizo's M.O. has become pretty clear. Sure, we can alter the NPC's however we wish, and we often do, but doesn't the same hold true for predominantly LGBT groups? Aren't they just as capable of altering the NPC's to suit their group's preferences?