Anyone who thinks that show business has anything to do with "fairness" is naive (or at the very least far too idealistic). Life in general has never been "fair." Some folks seem to get all the breaks while, for others, their lives read like a series of bad luck stories.

First of all, casting in a film should be based upon whether the actor is capable of delivering a convincing performance. That determination is made by the director, the casting director, the producers, and the studio heads... who can't be totally objective. Each has personal and professional reasons for favoring one actor over another.

Unfortunately (and what is wholly unfair to many actors vying for parts), an actor's box office bankability is often the determining factor, rather than their appropriateness for the role or their acting chops. But, it's called show "business" for a reason. The investment required to produce a film makes for a substantial risk. In the case of casting a major queer role in a film, often the calculation is whether movie fans will be intrigued with seeing the star play the part.

What is definitely unfair in many cases is that a straight actor convincingly playing a gay role is often regaled as "brave." Not to discount the performances mentioned in this piece: Gyllynhaal, Redmayne, and Swank in particular, all fantastic in their own rights.