But that also makes no sense because why would crying over Kairi come off as romantic but crying over Riku doesnâ€™t? Why is there a double-standard here?
It's not a double standard. Sora is clearly straight.
Are we not considering the fact that actions themselves retain a meaning by the contextual use, rather than to the action itself? Someone showing an emotional response for another, whether this by crying, holding hands, hugging, etcâ€”these specific actions aren't, in nature, designated exclusively for either platonic or romantic meaning. They fit along the spectrum of both, and act as a bridge even, between these different sectors of relationships. What sets actions to either side of this spectrum, what give them meaning, is the context (and by extension, subtext as a part of context) in which the actions take place.Iâ€™ll get to everything else when I get home but has Sora said he is straight? Has he shown more attraction to women over men? No. He has no set sexuality.
With that being said, the friendship and accompanying underlying romantic narrative between Sora and Kairi has been present from the very beginning, and it effectively acts as the defining nature of their character relationship as per characterization at this time. In effective ways, and in ineffective ways, this meaning has carried itself throughout the series multiple times. Having a discussion about its development or emphasis of effective implementation in light of criticism is one thing. But, understanding this being an integral part of their current relationship and characterization is hardly debatableâ€”this being deemed by the context so far. Unless a deviation of the nature of their relationship is shown, that defining tone acts as the backdrop and guide to understanding all of their interactions conveyed about or to each otherâ€”as it would/does for any type of relationship, whether complex or on the nose, that is set by the story.
So, when we see Sora missing Kairi, or crying over her, or holding her hand, or expressing emotion for herâ€”the context has set this meaning to abide by the nature of the current relationship (its current meaning), which has been established to be in the realm of friendship/romantic expression as of now. Of course, there are some actions that are more exclusive in the expression of romantic nature, true, but this not being displayed as of yet for the purpose of being concrete and on "the surface" doesn't negate or devalue the relevant elements between them that still represent the affiliating tones set for them right now.
As for the sexuality bit, it's kind of trivial at a certain point. If we're talking about the substance of romantic content displayed by Sora, this has been something that has only been conveyed towards Kairiâ€”thus, confirming that he does have an attraction towards females at the very least right now. Does this mean his sexuality won't change from this implication, or is even currently affiliated with other types of attractions? Not necessarily, but we're also asking a series of questions and inquiries that don't have any relevance to be answered effectively in the first place outside of personal speculative glory. I'm well aware this is all in question from the idea of romance between Sora and Riku for most people. But, lets not forget that in accordance to what is set in the context right now, the actions and emotions displayed between Sora and Riku are defined by their bond as childhood/best friends. The deviation of specific romantic expression has not been contextually/subtextually integrated between the two of them to effectively mark its presence in the story away from the nature already set as precedent. This has no bearings on the drive people have to ship them, as it never will for any pair ever, but there's a separation that needs to be acknowledged.
Nomura may have made comments about change, but what this means for the characters is still yet to be told.