A gay media conglomerate forced a volunteer board member to resign within two weeks of his appointment, not over any anti-LGBTQ statement, but because a journalist discovered he once wore a red Trump hat in a Facebook photo.
Jay Katari, a Utah-based serial entrepreneur whose businesses focus on autism services and helping people with disabilities, joined the board of equalpride as a "Strategic Advisor, Growth & Innovation." Equalpride is the parent company behind The Advocate, Out, and Them, three of the most prominent LGBTQ publications in the country. Roughly two weeks later, he was gone.
The chain of events started when Substack journalist Kevin Ortega-Rojas published a report noting that Katari had been "quietly" added to equalpride's board. Ortega-Rojas flagged a May 2024 Facebook photo showing Katari wearing a red hat reading "Trump" and "Keep America Great" while standing on a balcony with three other men. The journalist also pointed to Katari's social media activity, following Trump family members, posting content critical of former President Joe Biden, listing his pronouns as "dude/bro/guy/man/Jedi," and expressing support for Israel.
That was enough. Equalpride's editorial staff marched to leadership demanding answers about Katari's role and publicly distanced themselves from him. Shortly after, Katari resigned. CEO Mark Berryhill announced the departure in an email to employees, and the company scrubbed Katari's name from its website.
What makes this episode worth examining closely is what Katari did not do. The California Post reviewed Katari's social media profiles and found no explicit anti-LGBTQ sentiments. None. The man born in Canada, who moved to Florida to finish high school and college, was volunteering his time and business expertise for a company whose mission he said he supported.
His statement, shared through CEO Berryhill, was gracious to a fault:
"I never intended for my involvement to cause disruption within a community I hold dear and deeply respect."
He added that his "intention was simply to volunteer my time and experience to support the incredible team and the important work they do for the LGBTQ+ community." The investor board-appointment agreement that had placed Katari on the board ended after his departure.
But the editorial staff at equalpride framed the situation in starkly ideological terms. In a statement to The Advocate, their own publication, the team declared their position without ambiguity:
"As a small team of queer and trans journalists, we were deeply concerned by reports that an equalpride board member had a history of expressing support for Donald Trump and his MAGA agenda on social media. Given this administration's attacks on the LGBTQ+ community, it was immediately clear to us that his involvement with the company was untenable."
Read that again. The staff did not cite a single anti-LGBTQ remark. They did not point to a discriminatory policy Katari personally championed. They said his "support for Donald Trump" made his involvement "untenable." Full stop. In the political environment that continues to divide institutions across the country, a volunteer board member's private political views were treated as a firing offense.
Ortega-Rojas also dug into Katari's political giving. OpenSecrets records show Katari donated $10,000 to former Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes and $2,000 to Kentucky politician Christopher Thieneman. The donations were folded into the broader narrative of Katari as a MAGA sympathizer unfit to serve on the board of a gay media company, even though donating to political candidates is a constitutionally protected activity that millions of Americans engage in regardless of party.
The entire dossier amounted to a hat photo, some social media follows, a few donations, a joke pronoun bio, and support for Israel. No slurs. No anti-gay advocacy. No policy work against LGBTQ interests. A man who ran businesses helping people with autism and disabilities wanted to lend his skills to an LGBTQ media company, and the staff decided his political identity disqualified him.
CEO Berryhill's response tells its own story. Rather than defending Katari or asking the staff to evaluate the man's actual conduct, Berryhill announced the departure by email. The company scrubbed Katari's name from its website. The message was clear: political conformity is a prerequisite for participation, even at the board level, even for unpaid volunteers.
Equalpride did not respond to The California Post's request for comment. Katari, despite multiple outreach attempts, also did not respond to the outlet directly. His only public words came through the CEO's employee email, a carefully worded statement that bent over backward to avoid confrontation.
This pattern, institutional leadership capitulating to ideological staff pressure rather than standing on principle, has become familiar across media, academia, and corporate America. The broader climate of institutional distrust makes these episodes more consequential, not less. When organizations signal that private political beliefs are grounds for expulsion, they narrow the range of people willing to serve, volunteer, or engage at all.
Several questions remain unanswered. Was Katari compensated for his board role, or was it entirely voluntary as he stated? Who comprised the lead investor group that held the board-appointment agreement? And did equalpride's leadership ever push back on the staff's demands before agreeing to part ways with Katari?
Equalpride publishes The Advocate, Out, and Them, outlets that have long positioned themselves as champions of inclusion and diversity. Their editorial mission rests on the premise that people should not be judged or excluded for who they are. Yet the staff's own statement reveals a glaring exception: if who you are includes voting for or supporting the wrong candidate, inclusion evaporates.
Katari's case is a small one in the grand scheme. One man, one board seat, one hat photo. But the principle at stake is not small. Tens of millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump. The suggestion that any of them are automatically unfit to volunteer for an LGBTQ organization, regardless of their actual conduct or stated goodwill, is not a standard rooted in tolerance. It is a political litmus test dressed up as moral clarity. The ongoing turbulence in political life makes it all the more important for organizations to distinguish between genuine hostility and mere political disagreement.
Katari said he wanted to help. The staff said his politics made that impossible. Leadership sided with the staff. And now the company that publishes magazines about acceptance has made clear exactly who is not accepted.
When "diversity" means everyone must think the same way, it is not diversity at all, it is conformity with a better marketing budget.
