When I learned that Sidwell Friends School in D.C. banned Redskins gear this month my heart filled with sorrow. I couldn’t help but think that maybe those in our nation’s capital are telling me that my own proud Navajo Redskin tradition, our stories, our spirits or our own Redskins sports teams, are no longer welcome or worthy enough to even appear at an influential private school. Growing up, my friends and I could only dream of having an NFL team nearby, one which represented “us” in the nation’s capital, so certainly Sidwell’s native students -- if they were like us -- would have stood up to protest this ill-informed action. But then I learned there are no Indians enrolled there -- not one. 

Looking deeper, I discovered that Sidwell’s “governance” code dictates that policy changes needed to consider the “views of all relevant persons and constituencies.” The Quaker process says that those impacted should be invited into a decision-making process, “either through significant representation, inclusive consultation, or as a group.” So, when I found out who was invited to represent me, the outcome became immediately clear. The school had invited not our spiritual leaders or our historians, but a ‘pay-to-speak’ Indian activist named “Gyasi Ross” -- a regular in the ‘native grievance’ industry. 

Ross is simply a cog in the anti-Redskin, anti-America machine. He is part-time writer for a controversial newspaper owned by the chief uber-wealthy Redskins name-change nemesis, casino-boss and “Change the Mascot” movement-funder Mr. Ray Halbritter. 

Ross also appears as a voice within the Un-Settling America DeColonization movement which operates from a segregationist belief that ‘All people not indigenous to North America are living on this continent are settlers on stolen land’ and that non-natives are “…settlers are not entitled to live on this land.” 

To this end, Ross has routinely called for a native “mentors” to promote a new generation of “hell raisers” to be “…subversive leaders who are willing to get arrested.” Ross wants his followers “…to be able to say inflammatory things and to not be constrained by rules of politeness and political correctness.” 

To achieve his goals, Ross explains the need for minorities to leverage the platforms of white, high-end, guilt-minded liberals explaining, “If it sounds cold blooded like it’s a booty call, it kind of is. You need to come over, do your thing, and get out.” 

So, while Ross must have been thrilled with the school’s new anti-Redskin dress policy, his ‘victimization’ mantra was publically neutered only days later when the Washington Post released findings where 91 of 100 of Native Americans don’t actually take issue with the Redskins name. And, of the nine percent who said they were “offended”, the paper provided interviews of the aggrieved which indicate that the name itself isn’t necessarily offensive, but how the name was treated, such as when non-natives wear face paint or wear headdresses. Therefore, in the spirit of treating the name with respect, I wonder if Ross explained to the children that Redskin gear didn’t actually feature an offensive “mascot”, but instead the profile of an historic native leader named Two Guns Whitecalf.

Ross could have pointed out that it was the one-time National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) President Blackie Wetzel who actually made the case for the Chief in gracing NFL helmets so that Chief Whitecalf’s story -- as an ambassador for all natives -- would positively impact millions who might never know about our history and culture otherwise. 

If Sidwell had lived up to its own policy bylaws they might have invited Blackie Weltzel’s son, Don Wetzel Sr. to speak instead. He would have explained that the portrait/logo was first approved by many other tribes and that everyone knew, “that an Indian from the state of Montana created that logo, and he did it the right way. It represents the Red Nation and it’s something to be proud of.”

Perhaps the young activist simply didn’t know this important part of Redskins history?  Not likely, as the activist Mr. Ross and Mr. Wetzel both hail from the very same Blackfoot Tribe – but more importantly – it’s the same tribe of Chief Two Guns Whitecalf… Blackfeet all! 

So, would it not be reasonable at a school featuring a Latin slogan meaning “Let the light shine” – that Mr. Ross would disclose this appropriate and meaningful history? After all, it seems that it would provide part of the solution to what he claims is an ongoing “settler class” push for the ‘invisibleization’ of natives.

Hypocrisy aside, the school’s own principal delivered what looked like final misinformed cultural blow to the respected Blackfoot Chief in summarizing:  “Our student government passed a resolution stating that the mascot of the District’s National Football League team is offensive and antithetical to the values of the community.”  

In a final bit of culturally destructive irony, Sidwell’s leadership must be aware that their schools 1883 founding heralded yet another damaging D.C.-based policy upon the Blackfoot Nation. The same year the school opened its doors, Washington launched the “Indian Religious Crimes Code” which sought to eliminate native identity by banning customs, dances and -- (ready for this?) -- distinctively native themed clothing. While Sidwell’s ban might only see a student sent home to change, the 1883 version came with up to 90 days of jail time and loss of government rations. That year, the Blackfoot Nation lost ¼ of its total population in what they still call "Starvation Winter". 

Indian Country is still recovering from a string of ill-informed yet well meaning D.C. policies today.  That said, the question for Sidwell is, “Do you consider Ross, a man dedicated to grooming ‘hell raisers’ and ‘subversive leaders willing to get arrested’, worthy of honestly representing Native Americans or your Quaker ‘decision’ guidelines?  Are you really comfortable with Ross’ ability to represent natives from nearly 600 tribes who just shouted that 91 out of 100 of us do not take offense in your using our Redskin name with honor?

I would ask that you reconsider your 2016 Redskin gear ban. I request that you allow members from my group, the Native American Guardians Association, to come and speak to your staff and children before you come to a final conclusion. After all, it’s 2016… not 1883. 

Mark Yellowhorse Beasley

President, Native American Guardians Association

Navajo Nation

www.facebook.com/NAGuardians/?fref=ts