I think this type of thinking has one delineation. Stealthable characteristics and not.

In your example, someone can be gay and us not know it until they announce it, and its the same with quite a few characteristics, though most of them are so linked with politics and ideology I think its inevitable. But someone could simply live thier life doing their best as one of those and no one could be the wiser.

Whereas being a woman or a jeet is always going to be open and out no matter what you do. You can't just be a quiet one, your only hope of being "accepted" is to be open and vehemently against your own kind in a manner that could harm you if people held it universally, but you do so because its principled or morally right. Thomas Sowell is probably the most accepted example of this, as no one cares he is black because he has shown himself to be above such.

I think guys like Kirk and many other less-RINO'd conservatives are looking at things in a practicality mindset, in that "X demographics exist and vote, so we need to get them on our side and not drive them into the arms of the enemy." This is why I believe Trump keeps working for these groups, its not truly pandering and more attempting to do "the right thing" either morally or in the "we need to win to help anyone" sense.

Whereas most of us are in a far more radical camp simply because we are willing to entertain if not support ideas like complete removal of X demographic from the country, removal of their voting rights, and other more extreme measures. This is more Conservative in the ideological sense and overall the better option in general, but its unpalatable to a large amount of people to a point where the very idea of it simply doesn't come into their mind. So they fit the problem into their more limited ideology and make it work, which is how you get the problem you are describing.