We asked for a syllabus. They called it a threat to democracy.



It’s good to be back in the Advocate — the self-described “world’s leading source of LGBTQ+ news and information.” The last time it covered me, it involved a spat with a group of criminal, gay furry hackers. It never published the follow-up when one of those hackers was arrested, just as I promised. This time, I’ve committed an even greater sin in the Advocate's eyes: I asked a woke, gay professor at a public university to share his syllabus.

That professor, Christopher Petsko, teaches at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. And his reaction — along with the left’s coordinated meltdown — tells you everything you need to know about how deeply embedded DEI ideology remains in taxpayer-funded higher ed.

The Trump administration has made its position clear. Our job is to ensure it follows through.

Here’s what we’re doing. The Oversight Project submitted public records requests for syllabi from professors at public universities — institutions subject to state transparency laws. President Trump and his administration have made it a public priority to root out diversity, equity, and inclusion programs from the federal government and its beneficiaries, including universities. Our aim is to determine whether schools are complying with the law — or rebranding DEI under another name.

Because if they are, the administration should know. And act.

Follow-through matters. We’ve seen high-profile announcements on anti-DEI and anti-anti-Semitism efforts before, only to watch the implementation get outsourced or quietly neutered. Columbia University, for example, partnered with the far-left Anti-Defamation League to monitor itself for anti-Semitism — then gave itself a clean bill of health. That’s theater, not accountability.

It's the same story with the so-called crackdown on law firms weaponizing their influence. We contacted many of the firms that pledged pro bono support for conservative clients. Most didn’t respond. Most have done nothing. We’ll be publishing the receipts soon.

In that context, our university initiative is simple: Show us the syllabi. If DEI ideology is still embedded in coursework, the public deserves to know. Instead, some of these professors are losing their minds.

Petsko responded with a melodramatic LinkedIn post:

Keep doing the work you were trained to do. Keep educating others. Keep sharing your expertise. And don’t let vague references to executive orders make you question whether you have a right to be sharing your knowledge with the world.

He then declared he would not release his syllabus. (Too late.)

Other academics rallied to his side. Colin Carlson of Yale took to Bluesky to frame our request as “targeted harassment at scale.” Kate Starbird of the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public responded, “Of course they are.”

RELATED: Harvard’s hypocrisy hits the courtroom

  Harvard's hypocrisy hits the courtroomPhoto by Rick Friedman / Contributor via Getty Images

The irony, of course, is that these same people preach transparency when they’re not the ones being scrutinized. Why is it that transparency always seems to flow one way — targeting the right while the left hides behind tenure and taxpayer funding?

Next came a hit piece from Inside Higher Ed, which apparently objects to anyone trying to get inside higher ed. I told Inside Higher Ed:

UNC is a public school with a long track record of discrimination. Syllabi are public records and belong to the public. We intend to let the public know what is being taught at a public school. That’s not intimidation. It’s good governance and transparency. If a professor is too much of a wimp to let me read his syllabus, then he’s in the wrong business.

The response? A pile of quotes from leftists accusing us of “chilling free speech” and “intimidation.” Apparently, basic accountability is now oppression.

As for Petsko — he didn’t get the last word.

We now have his syllabus. And surprise: It’s loaded with DEI propaganda. Required reading includes “Dear White Boss,” which claims white executives should be forced to read it. Another entry, “Why Diversity Programs Fail,” criticizes corporate DEI efforts for not going far enough. Students are also instructed to listen to “How to Bust Bias at Work,” which promotes race-based promotion practices.

This is what passes for education at a public university.

The University of North Carolina is out of compliance with federal policy. The Trump administration has made its position clear. Our job is to ensure it follows through.

And we intend to do exactly that.

Self-Righteous Teen Vogue Staffer Who Got Her Editor Fired Once Tweeted Racial Slurs Herself

Teen Vogue social media manager Christine Davitt, who is of mixed Irish and Filipino descent, tweeted racial slurs in 2009.

PETA says using animal names as verbal insults is 'supremacist language,' urges end to 'anti-animal slurs'



People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is on another woke jag this week, tweeting out an appeal to humans and asking them to stop using animal names as verbal insults toward other humans.

Why? Well, doing so constitutes "supremacist language," for one thing.

Instead, PETA said, if you want to insult someone you believe lacks bravery, don't call that person a "chicken" — that would be insulting to chickens. Instead, the animal-rights organization suggested, call that person a "coward."

 
Words can create a more inclusive world, or perpetuate oppression.Calling someone an animal as an insult reinforc… https://t.co/E8UAVNzMSL
— PETA (@PETA)1611680533.0
 

And if someone tends to tattle-tale or constantly report others' behavior, don't call that person a "rat" — use "snitch" instead. In addition, say "jerk" instead of "snake," "repulsive" in lieu of "pig," and "lazy" instead of "sloth."

"Words can create a more inclusive world, or perpetuate oppression. Calling someone an animal as an insult reinforces the myth that humans are superior to other animals & justified in violating them," PETA added in the tweet. "Stand up for justice by rejecting supremacist language."

Were they done?

PETA wasn't through. The organization continued with another tweet saying, "Anti-animal slurs degrade animals by applying negative human traits to certain species. Perpetuating the idea that animals are sly, dirty, or heartless desensitizes the public and normalizes violence against other animals."

And: "Speciesist language isn't just harmful, but it is also inaccurate. Pigs, for instance, are intelligent, lead complex social lives, and show empathy for other pigs in distress. Snakes are clever, have family relationships, and prefer to associate with their relatives."

PETA finally concluded with the following post: "PETA urges everyone who believes in equality and justice to take a look at their personal beliefs and the language they use, and break free of this outdated mindset that denigrates other animals. Always be kind and consider not using insults at all."

How did folks react?

As you might guess, there was a tad of pushback among Twitter users against PETA's pleas:

  • "Come back to me about being less superior than animals when an anteater builds a house," one commenter said.
  • "6 years vegan, please stop making us look ridiculous," another user demanded.
  • "LMAO But we ARE superior to animals; we are literally superior, mentally, and in most cases physically; our intelligence is far past the intelligence of animals, and we are justified in killing and eating them; we're carnivores LOL," another user observed. "I guess I'm a supremacist."
  • "Specieism? I think that's more when orgs like yours demonize and openly kill dogs and cats for the sin of being meat eaters while only caring about barnyard animals," another commenter noted. "You openly admit to murdering dogs and cats just for being homeless in this very thread, so...self awareness?"

Boulder at major college got called racist name in 1925 newspaper story — and black students this summer called for its removal. That plan is underway.



At the University of Wisconsin-Madison is a 70-ton boulder named Chamberlin Rock — in honor of Thomas Crowder Chamberlin, a geologist and former university president, the Wisconsin State Journal reported.

But on Oct. 9, 1925, the Wisconsin State Journal printed a story about the process of digging up the boulder — and it was referred to in the story as a "n*****head," which was a commonly used expression in the 1920s to describe any large dark rock, the paper said.

It's unclear if or for how long the boulder was called that racist name, the Journal said, adding that the term itself appeared to fade from common usage by the 1950s. In addition, the paper said university historians identified the news story as the only known instance of the offensive term being used.

Fast forward to 2020

But in the wake of George Floyd's death in May and the nationwide protests and rioting that followed — including the tearing down and demands for removal of statues and monuments with any connection to racism — the Wisconsin Black Student Union followed suit over the summer and called for the removal of Chamberlin Rock, the Journal said.

And just last week UW's Campus Planning Committee unanimously voted to recommend to Chancellor Rebecca Blank that the boulder be removed, the paper reported.

Plan to remove 70-ton boulder from UW-Madison's Observatory Hill moves forward https://t.co/sTdKvTf3nG
— Wisconsin State Journal (@Wisconsin State Journal)1605738007.0

Blank has previously indicated she supports the rock's removal, the Journal added, although a timeline for such a project hasn't been established.

UW's Black Student Union President Nalah McWhorter said the boulder is a symbol of daily injustices students of color face on the predominantly white campus, the paper said.

"This is a huge accomplishment for us," she told the Journal on Wednesday. "We won't have that constant reminder, that symbol that we don't belong here."

Kacie Butcher, the university's public history project director, said there was a Ku Klux Klan presence throughout Madison in the 1920s and on-campus minstrel shows, the Capital Times reported.

"That racism hasn't left campus. It's just changed, and this rock … is a symbol of this ongoing harm," Butcher said, according to the Times. "We have a real opportunity here to prioritize students of color and their experiences — something we haven't really done historically — and this is an opportunity for us not to trivialize these demands, but instead truly engage in these really complex conversations."

Now what?

As far as what will happen to the rock once it's lifted from its spot, the Journal said options include burying it at its original resting place, breaking it apart and disposing of it, or moving the rock to the Ice Age Trail — a thousand-mile footpath formed by glacial ice in Wisconsin.

More from the paper:

The Black Student Union is conducting a survey and hosting an open forum on Sunday to gather feedback on members' preferences, which it will then take back to the Campus Planning Committee.

The group is also working with the Department of Geoscience, which sees educational value in the rock and its rich geological history. Carried by glaciers from perhaps as far north as Canada, the boulder was excavated from the side of Observatory Hill in 1925.

Geochronology professor Brad Singer told the committee the department prefers it be relocated so instructors can continue using it as a teaching tool.

UW-Madison needs to secure approval from the Wisconsin Historical Society before removal begins because the rock is located near an effigy mound.

The first step requires UW-Madison to submit a request to disturb a catalogued burial site. All Native Tribes of Wisconsin are notified during the process, which can take 60 to 90 days and includes a 30-day comment period. A qualified archeologist is also required to be on site during removal.

Officials estimate the cost to remove the boulder ranges from $30,000 to $75,000, the Journal said.

Once the rock is gone, McWhorter told the paper that the Black Student Union will focus on generating ideas for how students of color can reclaim the space, such as installing a piece of art.

"So it becomes a way to celebrate instead of having it as an empty space reminding us of what it once was," she added to the Journal.

Anything else?

The school's Black Student Union over the summer also called for the removal of an Abraham Lincoln statue on campus.

McWhorter at the time said the iconic former president who abolished slavery was "very publicly anti-black" and that "just because he was anti-slavery doesn't mean he was pro-black."

Since then the school's College Republicans launched a petition in opposition to the school's student government passing legislation that calls for the removal of Lincoln statue, the College Fix said.

The legislation from the Associated Students of Madison says the Lincoln statue is a "remnant of the school's history of white supremacy," the outlet said.

“UW-Madison student gov votes to remove Lincoln statue, a 'remnant' of 'white supremacy'”“Students argue that Pre… https://t.co/sCcynh7nMP
— Eduardo Neret (@Eduardo Neret)1603907514.0

But Blank, UW's chancellor, pushed back on demand to remove the Lincoln statue, the Fix said, which cited her June statement on the matter:

The university continues to support the Abraham Lincoln statue on our campus. Like those of all presidents, Lincoln's legacy is complex and contains actions which, 150 years later, appear flawed. However, when the totality of his tenure is considered, Lincoln is widely acknowledged as one of our greatest presidents, having issued the Emancipation Proclamation, persuaded Congress to adopt the 13th Amendment and preserved the Union during the Civil War.

Blank also said as the "leader of UW-Madison, I believe Abraham Lincoln's legacy should not be erased but examined, that it should be both celebrated and critiqued," the Fix noted.