so what?

It does not change anything of the plotlines in the book.

If you have liked it, and if you have not explicitly showed acknowledgement to homosexuality, are you going to dislike Harry Potter as a story or dislike Dumbledore as a character?

Does it matter?

I am actually glad that J.K. Rowling "revealed" this "fact" or the fact that she was writing with Dumbledore being gay in her mind.

I rather think she was sharing her writing process to her fans, not deliberately wanting to ruin their "perfect" image of the great master of the magic world.

If his sexuality played a role in the story development and was essential to certain decision making, his sexuality would have been revealed and printed.

It is like a stage performance or a movie, everything is meaningful if the audience can see it.

It is like a science report presentation, everything carries a point if it is put on the broad.

I went to see a off-broadway musical "Walmartopia".

I paid attention to actors who were not under the spotlight in a given scene. They were doing a great job. Even though at the moment they were supposed not to be noticed by audience, they were still on the stage and they were still in their characters. And audience like me who had some stage performance training way back when would appreciate their staying in their characters when they were "invisible" outside of the spotlight.

Nothing is meaningless in a story-telling presentation.

Nothing is meaningful if it is not presented.

So what?

He's gay. Simply a piece of demographic information that does not determine anything.