I know nothing about him at all other than this article and one other on the same topic.  The other one seemed to say that the patriarch had a reputation for being pro-gαy.  I am not sure why this was the case.  I believe this was the reason that the interviewer asked him about it.  He seems very clear on his commitment to Catholic teaching, so I expect that whatever led someone to conclude that he was pro-gαy was a mistake or even a willful distortion.  

It did not occur to me to be pleased about the fact the His Beatitude was referred to as "Patriarch" until today. The head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church has (in my opinion) long been denied his rightful title of patriarch as a sop to the Orthodox.  He was previously called a major archbishop for this reason.  I have no particular desire to annoy the Orthodox, but facts are facts and by every rational and historical standard the man is a patriarch.  I am delighted that either the Vatican finally recognized this, or that His Beatitude just started using his rightful title and no one in Rome told him to stop.

Also, I must admit that "His Beatitude" is a guess about how he should be addressed or referred to.  The title may be something different.