Marissa Darlingh at the April 23rd rally: Her free speech forbidden by Wisconsin
They’re coming for you next: A Wisconsin teacher, Marissa Darlingh, has been threatened with loss of her teaching license by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) for speaking publicly — on her own time and as a private citizen — at a feminist rally on April 23, 2022 against the modern queer movement to introduce perverse sex instruction into elementary schools.
During that rally, Ms. Darlingh publicly expressed that she “oppose[s] gender ideology” in elementary schools and that young children should not be “exposed to the harms of gender identity ideology” or given “unfettered access to hormones—wrong-sex hormones—and surgery.” She argued passionately that she “exist[s] in this world to serve children” and “to protect children,” and does not support social or medical transition of young children. In the passion of the moment, Ms. Darlingh at one point said “[expleteive] transgenderism,” referring to the “gender identity ideology” that she believes harms children.
The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) issued Ms. Darlingh a letter on April 29, informing her that the agency opened an investigation to determine whether to revoke her educator license for “immoral conduct” at the April rally. The letter cites Darlingh’s use of profane language as well as her statements “oppos[ing] gender identity ideology from entering [her] school building” and her statements that she “do[es] not believe children should have access to hormones or surgery” as examples of her “immoral conduct.”
You can view the DPI letter here [pdf]. In threatening to take away Darlingh’s right to teach, it also gave her the option to end the public investigation if she would simply “surrender her license.” To do so DPI kindly included an agreement for her to sign.
In other words, “You sure have a nice looking resume. It sure would be a shame if something happened to ruin it.”
Darlingh not only did not surrender her license, she enlisted legal help from the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL), which immediately sent a letter to DPI [pdf] telling it to back off or face a lawsuit for violating Darlingh’s first amendment rights. The letter also took the offensive, closing with this demand:
Indeed, your letter is such a blatant and troubling violation of First Amendment rights that it immediately makes one wonder how often DPI is wielding the “immoral conduct” statute to stifle speech it opposes. Therefore, please also consider this letter an open records request for any DPI records, including emails, letters, and other communications from DPI employees, from January 1, 2019, to the present, referencing “immoral conduct” or Wis. Stat. § 115.31(1)(c) in the context of a third party’s license.
WILL is correct. The goal here by DPI is to intimidate teachers from publicly protesting its policy of indoctrinating little children with queer sexual concepts. While it is trying to destroy Darlingh’s career for speaking publicly against its policies outside of her job and as a private citizen, it apparently has done nothing against teacher Jamie Okusko, who was recorded making blatant anti-Republican statements in her classroom, to her students, while on the job. Her local district said it had opened an investigation, but more than a year later I can find no record anywhere of any action taken against Okusko.
Even if DPI backs off and Darlingh retains her license to teach, the real problem remains. As noted in this article, Wisconsin schools are already infused with leftist, Marxist, racist, and queer indocutrination. A better more productive response would be for Darlingh to open up her own small single-room school, offering parents an option to the corrupt public schools. She would likely make almost as much money, while being her own boss.
And she would be providing a service that parents would appreciate, while introducing some needed competition to the debased public school system.
A side note: I have decided to from now on refer to the effort by leftists and the sexual perverse to introduce their sexual preferences in the school room as “queer indoctrination” or “queer politics.” Since this is a term they themselves have proudly embraced to celebrate their preferences and their ideology, I am glad to use it, especially because they have also done nothing to change its meaning. Being queer still means being sexually perverted, except when the queer use it they are expressing pride in that perversion. I therefore think it is perfect to describe what these vile people are trying to do to little children.
It is also far better than calling them “groomers,” which though also true is just not as blunt or descriptive.