Requesting an LGBTQ+ curriculum is seen as a danger to democracy, it seems.

LGBTQ+ Advocacy and Syllabus Inquiry

It’s great to be back in the advocacy space—something I think is pretty vital. Recently, I initiated a rather controversial request: I asked a public university professor to share his syllabus. That professor, Christopher Petsco from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, reacted strongly, exposing much about the climate in taxpayer-funded education.

Here’s the thing. The Surveillance Project, which I’m involved with, filed a public records request for that syllabus. Public universities are obligated to uphold transparency laws, after all. In light of the Trump administration’s focus on dismantling diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, it’s crucial to discern if these campuses are complying with federal mandates or if they’re just rebranding these programs under new terms.

This situation isn’t new. While there have been bold announcements regarding anti-DEI and anti-Semitism efforts, the actual enforcement often seems weak or misdirected. Take Columbia University; their collaboration with left-leaning organizations to monitor anti-Semitism feels more like a performance than meaningful action.

It’s frustrating, really. We reached out to firms that promised to aid conservative causes, but many went silent. Expect to see documentation on that soon.

My university initiative is straightforward: Show me the syllabus. If bias is baked into course content, then the public has a right to know. Sadly, some professors seem to be more invested in their emotional responses than in transparency.

Petsco’s reply was a dramatic post on LinkedIn. He urged educators to persist with their teaching and resist any questioning of their right to share knowledge. Yet, he ultimately declined to provide the syllabus—a bit late for that now.

Other academics rallied around him, with Colin Carlson from Yale framing our inquiry as “harassment.” It’s curious, isn’t it? How transparency is often touted by those who only want to disclose what suits them. The inconsistency raises questions: Are they weaponizing tenure and taxpayer funds to shield themselves?

Inside Higher Ed chimed in, underscoring that the syllabus is public and should remain accessible. We’re merely advocating for good governance and accountability in educational settings. Yet, all we hear from critics is that we’re “stifling free speech” or engaging in “blackmail.” An odd take on accountability, I’d say.

Petosko didn’t get the last word, though. We have acquired his syllabus, and it’s illuminating. It features required readings such as “Dear White Boss,” which asserts that white executives must engage with it, alongside critiques of insufficient DEI efforts. There’s also content aimed at promoting race-based hiring practices.

This is what passes for education at a public university. It’s evident that the University of North Carolina isn’t adhering to federal policies, and the Trump administration’s stance on this is clear. Our mission is to ensure that compliance remains a priority.