> A 2019 study by Hua Sun and Lei Gao of Iowa State University found that from 1990 to 2015, same-sex couples were 73% more likely to be turned down for a mortgage than similarly qualified different-sex couples. In addition, same-sex couples who were approved for mortgages paid about 0.02% to 0.2% more, on average, in interest and fees.
https://www.investopedia.com/mortgage-lending-for-lgbtq-peop...
The US government has made positive changes to combat this practice,
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lgbt-banks/u-s-banks-...
but you would be mistaken to assume such discrimination has completely disappeared or doesn't still exist in similar forms.
So if the banks are inputting this to a "go/no go" algorithm, the results do not surprise me at all.
Also, we aren’t past that point.
The history of “rainbow washing” in corporate marketing material served the original purpose of saying “you’re welcome here”. There are many stores/places that choose to not serve queer people.
Publicly sharing that you will allow queer people to use your product is serving the interest of those users, but perhaps not the interest of every user. But the remaining users thankfully never had to question if they’d be served by that business, so there’s no need to signal anything to them.