Letter of Resignation

Wrongthink teacher resigns from her position teaching High School English.

Introduction: At the beginning of my fourth year teaching here in Washington State, it soon became apparent that the challenges were too great, and student safety too compromised, for me to continue teaching with a clear conscience.

Note: I have edited this letter to remove the names of the school and district I have resigned from (which is why I have capitalized the common noun phrase “School District”). However, the issues laid out in this letter are mirrored in districts across the country.

To whom it may concern,

It is with great sorrow that I hereby announce my resignation from the School District after careful consideration. I have tried my best as an individual teacher to make a difference for my students, but I am finding myself up against a wall that I could never have predicted when I first came into the profession just a few short years ago. I am completely overwhelmed by the myriad issues we face on a day-to-day basis, including pandemic learning loss, an extremely complicated mosaic of student needs, crowded classrooms, and students’ serious mental and social distress that are not being addressed. On top of all of these issues, public education is morphing into something that I can no longer be a part of with a clear conscience as it seeks to blend radical ideology into education. I am utterly depleted and beyond burnt out.

1. Hopelessly Broken System
   Throughout my entire teaching career, it has been clear that the U.S. public education system is lacking. One teacher simply cannot attend to all the learning needs of 20-30 students in a classroom for 50 minutes a day, despite what is expected of us. Give me half of a roster with any group of kids, and I can really teach them, but that’s an impossible ask in our current situation. 30 is already too many, and the district’s idea of just paying teachers more when the classroom rosters go beyond capacity is disconnected from reality. I am unable to continue to be a cog in the broken machinations of the public education system. This is a nation-wide problem: this School District is doing well compared to the rest of the country, which is all the more horrifying when I realize I’ve reached the end of my rope and there is no “better” district to go to. While pandemic learning loss is huge, students have also become more addicted to their devices and social media, more socially anxious, grappling with more and more mental health issues. I have noticed classroom attention-seeking behaviors you would expect from young children. In our science class, we only just received the IEP of a very challenging student after requesting it and it turns out he’s needed a 1:1 aide this whole time and we had no idea. The “I” or “504” indicator does nothing without more information, it is just a label, and I still didn’t have all of the IEPs at a glance as of Monday. Besides that tardiness in receiving them, not sharing them with the paraprofessionals makes absolutely no sense whatsoever; are they allies in instruction with us in the classrooms or not? As just one teacher, it is challenging enough to comply with the IEP or 504 accommodations at a bare minimum. As we are so often reminded, you are legally obligated to provide the accommodations, it is not upon their request, but we all know there is more that needs to be done to help these students be successful—meanwhile addressing all of the other aspects to this mosaic of the whole class’s learning needs. I can not fulfill my duty to any of my students in today’s learning environment. This is the exact circumstance that led me to resign today, as I was game to keep fighting against a corrupt system as long as I could still take care of the students’ learning needs, at least for most of them most of the time. This is an impossible ask now, and I can not live with the guilt of working in a system that gets more broken with each year. On top of everything else, as we continue to face challenges in learning deficits and behavior issues post-pandemic, the anti-scientific, postmodernist professional development seminars the staff are being subjected to do more harm than good.

2. Radical Ideology
   The trigger that set me on the path to question my employment was during a mandatory, virtual seminar on gender inclusivity in schools. I was open-minded to it when it began, because I want to do everything I can as a teacher to support all of our students, including our LGBTQ+ youth. However, what happened during that PD was unforgivable. The introduction included a warning against the “Amygdala Hijack,” where we were cautioned against our traitorous instincts. In the following moments, the presenters explained to us that some children as young as 2 years old could already know their sexual identity. Without evidence or reasoning, they presented these statements as fact, before playing a YouTube video of trans children and youth celebrating their diversity and lamenting the hardships they and their families go through. The video included extremely young children, kindergarten and early elementary aged. We were led to believe that 4-year-olds and younger could be trans. We were held emotionally hostage by the sentiment that if we don’t relentlessly “affirm” a child’s “gender,” they may harm themselves or commit suicide. We were dutifully explained the K-12 gender and sexuality curriculum that was adopted long before I was hired by the District last summer.
   
   I never suspected anything like this when I accepted my position at the District, which I had believed to be a reputable, successful, and pro-science district. Since when is it a public educator’s duty to uphold the tenets of a radical ideology in postmodernist gender ideology and queer theory? I got into this profession because I love teaching and I love learning. It brings me great joy to see how kids learn, use their creativity and imagination, problem-solve and develop critical thinking skills. I didn’t get into this profession to stand with a fringe, anti-scientific worldview that seems a little too interested in children’s sexuality. I am sure the PD was introduced into our district with the best of intentions, but this was at best an assault on reality, and at worst a trojan horse for pedophilia.
   
   It is developmentally inappropriate to introduce the ideas presented to us during the PD to young children. Children learn about the world through play, and we should respect that rather than foist a new postmodernist worldview on them. There are no 4-year-old trans kids; there are 4-year-olds at play. It is imperative that as an educational institution we understand this basic tenet of childhood development rather than be a part of the machinations that rush them down a road of societal affirmation that most often leads to medical transition. It is extremely inappropriate to expect teachers to reinforce a “gender-affirming” approach at all costs. The district tells us that it is our duty to use a child’s chosen name and pronouns and to keep the parents in the dark about it if the student requests it. It is concerning that the district supports regularly keeping secrets from parents about what happens during the school day. Furthermore, there is no evidence that proves an affirm-only approach is appropriate for children with gender dysphoria. Other Western countries are seeing the evidence and changing their policies around trans youth. In the UK, the Tavistock Youth Gender Clinic was shut down after a wave of lawsuits. Detransitioners’ voices need to be heard and respected; many youth were set on the path to medically transition with encouragement from their school districts. Teachers and schools always have the best of intentions, but our capacity for empathy has been taken advantage of by the trans activists and ideologues. We are not doctors, psychologists, or the parents of these children, and we are way out of line to adopt this trend under the umbrella of education. Please don't misinterpret this: I agree with the necessity for age-appropriate sex education curriculum. I believe that mature high school students are capable of having deep, civil but largely uncensored discussions about gender and sexuality. However, this topic certainly doesn’t belong in the kindergarten curriculum or early elementary school curriculum. Although I do not teach the younger grades, I can not ignore how the approach that the district is taking could be damaging our youth and our whole community. It will have cascading effects at all grade levels. Most significantly, it highlights the district’s tenuous relationship with reality, which is a sign that there will be more trouble to come.

3. Reality is Real
   If we can not operate under the same basic principles of reality, how am I expected to teach? How are students expected to learn? When I set out to teach Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, how can we even discuss gender roles in pre-colonial Nigerian society if “gender” is a white colonial social construct? How can I present the Year-Long Essential Question “what does it mean to be human?” when seeking out our similarities rather than emphasizing our differences is deemed racist and culturally marginalizing? I have been dancing around words and concepts and ideas like shards of glass throughout my whole career, and the Gender Inclusivity PD tripled that stress. According to the PD, I should no longer refer to young men and women as such, and I should avoid all gendered language. However, gender roles are a real human phenomenon across all cultures that we should be discussing and unpacking in a mature way. I can not muzzle myself further and be an effective teacher, nor should students feel that they have to muzzle themselves—it’s hard enough for them to open up as it is. Nevertheless, the district seems to only be concerned with keeping in-line with the latest ideological trends. How much of my professional time shall I examine whether every letter and every word of my curriculum is deemed “racist or anti-racist?”
   
   These radical ideas have largely sprouted from education’s noble, ongoing campaign against bullying. However, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Please understand that I stand strong with a firm anti-bullying approach for all students, especially LGBTQ+ youth. I want to see LGBTQ+ youth feel safe to be themselves, but not at the cost of other students: are we going to allow intact males into the locker room with teenage girls in this district? How about the integrity of women’s athletics? What about the rights of the young woman who is questioning herself, is gender non-conforming like I am, and the trans ideology gets foisted upon her—a decision that increasingly leads to a lifetime of medicalization? Being gender non-confirming and trans are now put into the same bucket and can be treated similarly, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics and other national organizations. By definition, as someone who does not conform to society’s female gender roles, I could be “trans,” too—and have access to all the medication I might like to feel ok in my own body. It should be plain as day how problematic this is. I’m certainly not transgender, but being a woman with a deep voice and backbone now compromises one’s womanhood. This will do more harm than good to LGBTQ+ youth: many youth who identify as trans in their tumultuous adolescent years come out as homosexual and happy in their bodies (without life-altering surgeries or medications) later on in life. Furthermore, encouraging young, questioning kids in elementary in middle school about trans ideology puts the trans option on a pedestal: they might know they are on the LGBTQ+ spectrum, but not where exactly, and it would be normal child behavior to choose the one that is the most celebrated and can give them the most social clout. Isn’t it homophobic to suppress the natural course of discovering one’s homosexuality by over-emphasizing trans ideology and pushing the idea that gender is a social construct? Most importantly: what place does this any of this theory have in the public education system? I don’t care what consenting adults do, and I have the utmost respect for the trans education professionals in our community, but pushing children to make serious medical-based decisions about their identity that can affect them for a lifetime is not the duty of teachers. I shouldn’t have to rail against it, but it was shoved down my throat in a mandatory professional development seminar, paid for by the district.

4. Student Safety
   Ever since what happened in Uvalde, TX, I often have extreme distress about coming to school in the morning, sometimes inciting a panic attack. Instead of beefing up security, our high school is as free and loose as ever; teachers and students don’t even blink letting people in the side doors, and it looks like this year we don’t even have our old security guard Steve. Gangs are a problem we have to face now. The school community lost classmates over the summer in drive-bys and overdoses, and many students are in mourning. The school hasn’t done a good job of addressing this from what I’ve seen. In fact, I can’t help but sense a bit of a famine mentality among students and staff. I’ve witnessed some very unusual behaviors from students that I wouldn’t have expected from this age group whatsoever, and I am completely unprepared to deal with it. As I have previously discussed, there simply isn’t enough attention to go around to meet all of their needs. The threats against our school really shook me, especially when teachers were kept in the dark about them. Then, like a bad SNL sketch, the district puts rent-a-cops in the hallways as if that’s an acceptable solution.
   
   The threats highlight the need to address student mental health. Students’ mental health is a serious issue we need to focus on for all students, and the current “equity-based” approach isn’t working. We do a lot of talking about mental health without taking it seriously. We have been explained time and time again the distinction between “equality” and “equity” with an image of differently-sized people trying to watch a baseball game over a fence. This cute illustration does not translate nearly as neatly into an actual classroom, especially when we are told that “equity” is the tool to combat “systemic racism.” If it’s about resources based on need, that’s something I can get behind, but equity through a postmodernist lens only creates a new landscape for racism.
   
   Is it also because of “equity” that the district appears to no longer have a relationship with local law enforcement? When our school receives threats, why are we sent a private security contractor and not visited by the Sheriff’s department during school hours?
   
   Rather than student safety, the district has other priorities, like Gender Inclusivity training, where I am told to ignore my instincts and swallow the idea that a 2-year-old could already know their sexual identity.
   

5. Conclusion
   I should be able to teach language and literature, explore the human condition, discover the nuances of grammar, and delve into some sociolinguistics with students all while embracing enlightenment values. I want to support students and work with other education and childhood development professionals who truly follow the science, but our institutions have been gravely compromised by subjective new ideologies that do more harm than good. The district is ensuring that teachers are thoroughly trained in anti-racist principles and gender ideology through mandatory professional development seminars.
   
   There is a great need amongst all students, and the current approach isn’t working for deeply systemic reasons—what I have highlighted is just the latest trend, barely a scratch on the surface of what we are up against. The students across K-12 need age-appropriate support and boundaries. We need to find solutions to helping these students, and include parents in on the conversation.
   
   I have not reached out to the union about any of this because I am worried that, based on the current environment, they wouldn’t have my back at all. I strongly disagree with the direction the NEA and the WEA have been going in for the past couple of years now, and I find it distasteful that they are demonizing parents for having legitimate concerns about what their children are being taught. I never thought that an organization that is supposed to support student and educator needs would take my money and use it for ideological virtue signaling and political motivations. Maybe it’s always been that way and I’m just figuring it out now—all the more reason to resign.
   
   I spent the summer reading stacks of books and doing research like someone with the credentials you hired me for should know how to. I am unconvinced by the radical gender ideology presented to us in the Gender Inclusivity Training PD and I believe it has no place in public schools. While I was considering staying and fighting for what is right, I am utterly exhausted and I need to accept defeat. The entire system is broken, it has never worked well. It was on life support before Covid, and the lockdowns absolutely destroyed it. For starters, public education needs to break up with the bizarre identity politics that only marginalizes students and staff and makes them afraid to consider out-of-the-box ideas and opinions, afraid to say the wrong thing or question the fallacy in a subjective but strongly-worded or racially-focused retort. I simply can not teach Multilingual Language Learners and English Language Arts in this environment anymore.
   
   The postmodernist approach by definition shuns Enlightenment values and divorces language from reality. I believe that instead, schools should embrace diversity of opinion, and be logical about what we all know to be true. This includes: that men and women are real, mammals are sexually male and female, and our perception of reality should not be held hostage by someone else’s gender dysphoria. Teachers should not be responsible for enforcing anybody’s radical ideology, and they should not be asked to keep secrets from parents.
   
   We are no longer operating in the same reality. The district wants to operate in a world where gender is chosen or optional, and kindergarteners should be introduced this concept right away. The district wants to operate in a world where intact males should be allowed in women’s locker rooms, bathrooms, and sports teams. The district wants to operate in a world where two-year-olds are already thinking about sex, and a mother’s protective instinct is an “amygdala hijack” that needs to be erased and replaced with an introduced ideology, lest we continue to live in an oppressive society. I reject these ideas resoundingly.

I feel an obligation to my profession to write and present this letter, although the temptation to quietly slip away under some excuse was certainly there. There is too much at stake, and at the very least it will give me some peace of mind knowing that at least I tried.

In the novel 1984 by George Orwell, the main character finds himself conflicted between what he knows to be reality and what the Party says is reality. At the end when he is captured and tortured, he is deemed sufficiently indoctrinated when he can finally accept the Party’s idea of reality, rejecting his own mind and perspectives as corrupt and weak. As O’Brien, a high-ranking Party official, explains:

“I tell you, Winston, that reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind, and nowhere else. Not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes, and in any case soon perishes: only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be the truth, is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party.”

Similar to the Party in 1984, reality is what the District says is reality. Thus, instead of shunning reality, I am resigning from my position as a teacher at the School District, effective immediately. I will continue my work as an independent education professional in settings that are less restrictive, less bureaucratic, completely disinterested in sexualizing young children, genuinely science-forward and more in-line with the Enlightenment values that I wish to uphold.

I hope this letter reaches you with a clear mind and you are able to consider my perspective. If not, please simply accept this resignation and hire somebody to replace me that more neatly fits your mold. Solzhenitsyn reminded me time and time again to Live Not By Lies, and I can not perpetuate the state-sponsored deception currently infecting public schools. I choose to live not by lies.

Thank you,

-Valerie R. Masai-Aspaas