Full Analysis Summary
OU transgender grading dispute
The University of Oklahoma placed transgender graduate teaching assistant Mel Curth on administrative leave while it investigates a religious-discrimination complaint from student Samantha Fulnecky.
The complaint followed Curth giving Fulnecky a zero on a required reaction paper.
Fulnecky's essay argued that gender roles are Biblically ordained and described acceptance of trans people as "demonic," and the complaint was filed in November.
The case has quickly drawn attention on social media and from conservative groups, prompting OU to say it is conducting a full review.
Coverage Differences
Reporting detail / timing
Them (Other) explicitly states the complaint was filed in November, while them.us (Other) notes the university 'has put' Curth on leave and LGBTQ Nation (Other) frames the action as occurring after Curth gave the student a zero. All three sources report the administrative leave and the substance of the student’s paper, but Them gives the specific filing month.
Tone / emphasis
LGBTQ Nation emphasizes Curth’s status as a recent Outstanding Graduate Teaching Award recipient and situates the episode within a broader trend of conservative escalation, whereas them.us and Them focus more on the complaint and the content of the paper itself (including the 'demonic' language) and the university response.
Grading dispute over essay
Curth and the course instructor say the grade was based on academic criteria.
They say the essay failed to meet the assignment's requirements.
They say it relied on personal ideology rather than empirical evidence.
They say it contradicted itself.
They say it contained offensive language about a minoritized group.
Curth publicly shared her grading rationale through Turning Point.
She said she deducted points for those academic reasons and cited major medical and psychological associations that recognize sex and gender are not strictly binary.
OU has said it is committed to fairness while it investigates.
Coverage Differences
Source of Curth’s public response
Them (Other) and them.us (Other) report that Curth 'shared her grading rationale publicly through Turning Point' or that Turning Point published both the paper and Curth’s response, while LGBTQ Nation (Other) summarizes Curth and the instructor’s academic rationale and notes Curth offered to discuss the assignment. In short, some sources highlight Curth’s public posting on Turning Point and others emphasize the internal academic rationale and offer to discuss.
University wording emphasized
them.us and Them both quote OU saying it is committed to fairness and protecting students’ sincerely held religious beliefs/rights, while LGBTQ Nation foregrounds the university’s procedural steps (full review, grade appeals process) in addition to noting the investigation.
Campus dispute over LGBTQ issues
Turning Point USA's OU chapter circulated the student essay and Curth's response, amplifying the dispute and sparking a social-media firestorm.
Conservative commentators, elected Republicans and right-wing groups further amplified criticism, with some calling to disqualify transgender people from teaching.
Coverage notes online attacks and demeaning comments directed at Curth.
Some reports place the incident within a broader pattern of conservative Christian students escalating disputes over LGBTQ issues on campus.
Coverage Differences
Narrative framing
LGBTQ Nation (Other) frames the episode as part of a broader trend of conservative escalation and highlights calls to bar trans educators and right‑wing amplification; them.us (Other) and Them (Other) emphasize the role of Turning Point in circulating the essay and the resulting online backlash. All three report attacks on Curth, but LGBTQ Nation situates the case within national political efforts to restrict LGBTQ‑affirming perspectives.
Curth’s availability for comment
them.us (Other) reports Curth did not respond to requests for comment, Them (Other) says attempts to reach Curth were unsuccessful, while LGBTQ Nation (Other) notes she offered to discuss the assignment — indicating variation in how sources report Curth’s availability and public engagement.
OU investigation and coverage
OU says it is conducting a full review, has placed a full-time professor in charge while the discrimination review continues, and implemented a grade-appeals process to ensure the student suffered no academic harm; the outcome of the investigation and any personnel decisions remain unresolved.
Coverage also notes Curth had received an Outstanding Graduate Teaching Award earlier in the year, a detail some outlets use to underscore the stakes of the complaint and the intensity of the response from conservative groups.
The facts reported are consistent across the outlets on the key points, though the sources differ slightly in emphasis and the specific details they foreground.
Coverage Differences
Procedural detail emphasis
LGBTQ Nation (Other) provides more procedural detail about OU implementing a grade appeals process and placing a full‑time professor in charge, while them.us (Other) and Them (Other) emphasize OU’s stated commitment to fairness and protecting sincerely held religious beliefs/rights. All report the investigation is ongoing.
Background detail
LGBTQ Nation and Them (Other) both mention Curth’s Outstanding Graduate Teaching Award as background, whereas them.us (Other) omits that specific credential in the excerpted coverage.