As a lifelong lover of literature and libraries, a mother of two school-aged children, and an English teacher-turned-professional writer, I have been extremely concerned about the state of academia and its impact on literature, libraries, and K-12 education since experiencing an ideologically monolithic climate while completing a doctoral program in the humanities from 2012 to 2018.
Thanks for this article, Christina. It's very encouraging to see such an interesting mix of readings that the Prohuman curriculum has identified for K-8, including the global inflection in the reading list, and diverse authors many of us don't know about. I'm looking forward to seeing the 9-12 curriculum and reading list.
Thanks to you and everyone at the Prohuman Foundation for your much-needed thoughtfulness and sane approach to curriculum development that has aspirations to free schools from politicized curricula (and teaching practices).
Very interesting and hopeful! I wonder how easy or hard it is to get a hearing for a program like this Prohuman curriculum, that challenges (gently, it seems to me) the current orthodoxy. Are you invited to present at ed conferences? Or maybe that’s not how it works. I hope it’s not as forbidding an environment as my cynical mind imagines!
Christina, I'm also very glad that you mentioned Daryl Davis in this article. I was very moved by his stories (some of them funny and yet nerve-wracking at the same time) at the Pluralism Conference last year, about converting KKK members and getting them out of that movement. He's a remarkable ambassador for truth-telling and common humanity above all else.
It would be good if schools taught students their obligations under the Equal Human Rights Act. A module based on universal rights and Article 29 would teach duties to society and the law. It would show that rights come with responsibility under international law and that respect for others allows people with different views to live together. It would teach that having rights does not allow anyone to take away the rights of others, and that individual rights end where harm begins—where actions humiliate, degrade, or block equal opportunity.
It would also show that DEI has been eroding equal human rights based on common humanity, and that identity politics creates division, not equality or cooperation. Students should learn that identity politics has never built a free or equal society EVER.
There is no example in history where identity-based politics, defined as organizing society around fixed group identities competing for power, has produced a free and equal society. Movements that began around identity achieved progress only when they shifted to universal human rights and human dignity, not group privilege.
Reform movements such as civil rights, Native American activism, and women’s rights succeeded because they demanded rights for all, not special treatment for some. When identity politics became the main system—Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, apartheid South Africa, Cambodia under Pol Pot, or Rwanda during the genocide—the result was oppression, violence, and division, not freedom or equality.
History shows that identity politics has never built a stable or just society. Fair systems rest on shared humanity, equal rights, and mutual respect, not on dividing people into competing groups.
Many people forget that the Equal Human Rights Act was created in response to the horrific identity politics used by the Nazis. Its purpose was to prevent governments from using identity to divide or oppress people, and to ensure that everyone was treated with the same dignity. It is tragic to see identity politics return and to see the United Nations, which drafted this framework, now influenced by DEI within its own system....
Teaching this as a module on human rights would show that equality depends on seeing all people as human, not as group members. It would teach that rights must be equal, reciprocal, and upheld by all. The values of gratitude, fairness, respect, and compassion are not optional virtues but duties required to fulfill obligations under human rights law. Teaching these values is not character education; it is legal literacy and compliance with international standards. Education should connect the language of human dignity to students’ international duties and remind them that freedom exists only with responsibility.
The obligation that each person upholds Article 29 includes respecting the rights and freedoms of others, meeting duties to the community, and acting in ways that support moral order, the public good, and the functioning of a democratic and pluralistic society. Schools should teach that each person’s rights end where they begin to erode the rights of others, and that these obligations form the foundation of a free and equal society. Without this understanding, rights lose their balance, and equality cannot be sustained.
⚖️ Erosion of Women's Rights: Failure to Uphold Article 29
Policy and language shifts violate the rights of biological women. This contravenes Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). This failure occurs because one group's identity claims override established sex-based rights.
Breach of Article 29: Duty and Respect
Article 29(2) defines how rights must be exercised. It mandates limits designed to secure the rights of others. Biological women are let down because the mutual duty required by Article 29 is ignored.
Males who identify as women enter spaces defined by sex. This includes job opportunities, scholarships, hospital wards, prisons, and sports. This violates their duty under Article 29(2). They fail to respect the privacy, dignity, safety, and equal opportunity rights belonging to biological women. These sex-based rights are absolute; they require exclusive, segregated spaces and protected access.
Policymakers permit self-identification to override sex boundaries. This failure avoids implementing necessary legal limitations. The state actively assists the infringement of women's rights in public life, neglecting the required recognition and respect.
Assault on Identity and Space
This represents systematic dismantling of women's standing. Replacing "woman" with terms like "birthing people" strips identity. This semantic erasure reduces women's legal status. It impedes advocacy for sex-specific rights and violates respect under the UDHR.
Allowing males access to spaces segregated by sex—including facilities and institutional settings like hospitals and correctional institutions—undermines the purpose of these female spaces: to protect women's privacy, dignity, and safety. These spaces belong to biological women by right.
The Non-Binary Solution: Fairness for All
The solution requires abandoning the binary conflict for a third space. Policy must reaffirm that "woman" means biological female. This definition underpins protected, sex-segregated spaces and access (e.g., job quotas, sports categories). This right must be inviolable.
This third space ensures transgender individuals receive the care, safety, and respect they deserve. However, reciprocity under Article 29 requires they cannot exercise their rights by taking the established rights of others. Transgender individuals must respect these boundaries. They must utilize separate, gender-neutral, or third-designated spaces and programs when necessary. This fulfills their responsibility under Article 29. The failure to enforce this mutual respect demonstrates an ongoing human rights failure under Article 29.
Thanks for this article, Christina. It's very encouraging to see such an interesting mix of readings that the Prohuman curriculum has identified for K-8, including the global inflection in the reading list, and diverse authors many of us don't know about. I'm looking forward to seeing the 9-12 curriculum and reading list.
Thanks to you and everyone at the Prohuman Foundation for your much-needed thoughtfulness and sane approach to curriculum development that has aspirations to free schools from politicized curricula (and teaching practices).
Very interesting and hopeful! I wonder how easy or hard it is to get a hearing for a program like this Prohuman curriculum, that challenges (gently, it seems to me) the current orthodoxy. Are you invited to present at ed conferences? Or maybe that’s not how it works. I hope it’s not as forbidding an environment as my cynical mind imagines!
Christina, I'm also very glad that you mentioned Daryl Davis in this article. I was very moved by his stories (some of them funny and yet nerve-wracking at the same time) at the Pluralism Conference last year, about converting KKK members and getting them out of that movement. He's a remarkable ambassador for truth-telling and common humanity above all else.
It would be good if schools taught students their obligations under the Equal Human Rights Act. A module based on universal rights and Article 29 would teach duties to society and the law. It would show that rights come with responsibility under international law and that respect for others allows people with different views to live together. It would teach that having rights does not allow anyone to take away the rights of others, and that individual rights end where harm begins—where actions humiliate, degrade, or block equal opportunity.
It would also show that DEI has been eroding equal human rights based on common humanity, and that identity politics creates division, not equality or cooperation. Students should learn that identity politics has never built a free or equal society EVER.
There is no example in history where identity-based politics, defined as organizing society around fixed group identities competing for power, has produced a free and equal society. Movements that began around identity achieved progress only when they shifted to universal human rights and human dignity, not group privilege.
Reform movements such as civil rights, Native American activism, and women’s rights succeeded because they demanded rights for all, not special treatment for some. When identity politics became the main system—Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, apartheid South Africa, Cambodia under Pol Pot, or Rwanda during the genocide—the result was oppression, violence, and division, not freedom or equality.
History shows that identity politics has never built a stable or just society. Fair systems rest on shared humanity, equal rights, and mutual respect, not on dividing people into competing groups.
Many people forget that the Equal Human Rights Act was created in response to the horrific identity politics used by the Nazis. Its purpose was to prevent governments from using identity to divide or oppress people, and to ensure that everyone was treated with the same dignity. It is tragic to see identity politics return and to see the United Nations, which drafted this framework, now influenced by DEI within its own system....
Teaching this as a module on human rights would show that equality depends on seeing all people as human, not as group members. It would teach that rights must be equal, reciprocal, and upheld by all. The values of gratitude, fairness, respect, and compassion are not optional virtues but duties required to fulfill obligations under human rights law. Teaching these values is not character education; it is legal literacy and compliance with international standards. Education should connect the language of human dignity to students’ international duties and remind them that freedom exists only with responsibility.
The obligation that each person upholds Article 29 includes respecting the rights and freedoms of others, meeting duties to the community, and acting in ways that support moral order, the public good, and the functioning of a democratic and pluralistic society. Schools should teach that each person’s rights end where they begin to erode the rights of others, and that these obligations form the foundation of a free and equal society. Without this understanding, rights lose their balance, and equality cannot be sustained.
⚖️ Erosion of Women's Rights: Failure to Uphold Article 29
Policy and language shifts violate the rights of biological women. This contravenes Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). This failure occurs because one group's identity claims override established sex-based rights.
Breach of Article 29: Duty and Respect
Article 29(2) defines how rights must be exercised. It mandates limits designed to secure the rights of others. Biological women are let down because the mutual duty required by Article 29 is ignored.
Males who identify as women enter spaces defined by sex. This includes job opportunities, scholarships, hospital wards, prisons, and sports. This violates their duty under Article 29(2). They fail to respect the privacy, dignity, safety, and equal opportunity rights belonging to biological women. These sex-based rights are absolute; they require exclusive, segregated spaces and protected access.
Policymakers permit self-identification to override sex boundaries. This failure avoids implementing necessary legal limitations. The state actively assists the infringement of women's rights in public life, neglecting the required recognition and respect.
Assault on Identity and Space
This represents systematic dismantling of women's standing. Replacing "woman" with terms like "birthing people" strips identity. This semantic erasure reduces women's legal status. It impedes advocacy for sex-specific rights and violates respect under the UDHR.
Allowing males access to spaces segregated by sex—including facilities and institutional settings like hospitals and correctional institutions—undermines the purpose of these female spaces: to protect women's privacy, dignity, and safety. These spaces belong to biological women by right.
The Non-Binary Solution: Fairness for All
The solution requires abandoning the binary conflict for a third space. Policy must reaffirm that "woman" means biological female. This definition underpins protected, sex-segregated spaces and access (e.g., job quotas, sports categories). This right must be inviolable.
This third space ensures transgender individuals receive the care, safety, and respect they deserve. However, reciprocity under Article 29 requires they cannot exercise their rights by taking the established rights of others. Transgender individuals must respect these boundaries. They must utilize separate, gender-neutral, or third-designated spaces and programs when necessary. This fulfills their responsibility under Article 29. The failure to enforce this mutual respect demonstrates an ongoing human rights failure under Article 29.
Great work, Christina. Thank you, thank you, thank you.