Idea
The Pun Tyrant
Is unneccessary LGBT theming in media considered pandering to said community?
As with many things with stories, I would say "necessity" isn't particularly a relevant factor. Like a character doesn't have to need to be gay for their inclusion to not be pandering. A character can just...be gay. I think the problem starts when that's the only leg you have to stand on though, or when you start using it as an excuse to cudgel against legitimate criticism, and pandering starts when you try to make a character's superficial elements the selling point as opposed to actual elements of the movie. A trailer for a movie about a character exploring their sexuality or overcoming oppression isn't pandering, or at least isn't necessarily pandering. A trailer which seems to bank entirely on the gender of the character on-screen when movie is intended to be about something else entirely is pandering.
Well, it's a lot more complex than this, namely the concentration can be a factor as well, but fundamentally pandering is a question of intent. Saying something is or isn't pandering can only be identified if you could read the mind of the people making the product. That said, while representation is not bad of course, but lets not kind ourselves, 99% of the reason a company does anything is for profit. I'm of course not saying it's the case every time, but for companies and hollywood and possibly others entities that aren't coming to mind right now, pandering isn't the anomaly, pandering is the default state, for any aspect of their marketing, PR and general stances on issues.