Comment: A Warrior on “Warriors”

An e-mail in response to the statement of Lt. Carl E. Benander:

Probably the best case yet that I have read for warriors. The more men and women like Lt. Benander that we have fighting over in Iraq, the better. Marquette could only hope to have more alumni like him. I still think the “pro-warrior” movement hurt itself by bringing out the old warrior gear with the Native American imagery. Had an early effort been made to de-link Warrior with the previous imagery, maybe there would have been more support from people like myself. I could certainly get behind a redefined Warrior, as you had mentioned in a previous post and as Lt. Benander spoke of, but there was no effort made by any members of the student body to pursue this course.

As it stands, I think the board careened well into their latest decision. As a Jesuit who shall remain nameless told me this week... “this board could f**k up a two car parade.” Nonetheless, the decision making process most recently announced seems well thought out and all inclusive. I am getting behind the name Fightin’ Jesuits as a mascot I’d like to see. Enjoy the summer.

Patrick Whitty,
President,
Democrats for Life-MU
Blogger Extrodanaire,
The Radical Centrist

Our own experience is that most members of the pro-Warrior movement did give up American Indian imagery, and did it because they were quite happy to compromise on this point. Some of them have returned to such imagery, given that the board had spat upon their attempts at compromise. No doubt for some Marquette will not only always be Warriors, but will always be Indian Warriors. But most of the people we know (students and alums) just wanted Warrior back.

We agree with Tom Witkowski that the best way to do away with Indian associations would have been to reinstate the Warrior, with a Greek or Medieval warrior as a mascot which would become in time the Warrior image. As it is, Marquette will always be “Warriors” and the warrior will be an American Indian.