Well, security in this context was referring to anti-counterfeiting measures.
But that doesn’t explain why, if you are going to go through a currency redesign for anti-counterfeiting reasons, would you need to necessarily feature the same person on the bill. No real difference putting Tubman on the redesigned bill (or anyone else for that matter) than putting a redesigned Jackson back on it.
One comment on the WaPo article (forgot to link it, sorry) was a suggestion to cycle through many different notable American persons and/or things on an ongoing basis. If each of the 6 major denominations (sorry $2 bill aficionados) is going to be revamped every 10 years then by staggering releases you could feature a new design on some denomination every couple years thus honoring many different people/things/ideas/institutions.
As I posted in another thread, a delay of 8 years is complete and utter bullshit.
In Canada:
November 2013 - Historian and author Merna Forster launched a petition that asked the central bank to recognize the achievements of women by placing noted Canadians on bank notes.
November 2014 - The petition has garnered more than 50,000 signatures.
March - April 2016 - nominations for notable women leads to a long list of 461 Iconic Canadian Women.
August 2016 - shortlist down to 12 names
December 2016 - Noted Canadian civil rights defender Viola Desmond chosen to be on the new $10 banknote. Design process begins
November 2018 - Viola Desmond $10 note enters circulation.
April 2019 - Canada’s Viola Desmond banknote wins international banknote of the year design.
TWO YEARS from choice of person on the banknote to entering circulation.
SIX YEARS from initial petition to international award.
I don’t think she’s being honored as a sex symbol. Nor do I think she’d care that you’re not attracted to her. Abe Lincoln isn’t considered attractive either, have you called the $5 bill ugly?
Never said or implied that any photo had to be sexy. Geez. Sex has nothing to do with a flattering photograph. Half the ones taken of me and my wife are deleted in the camera. Never to be seen by anybody.
The early paintings were not exact depictions of the people. The artist naturally tried to show them in the best possible way. Washington probably looked very different from his bill.
The photo of Tubman isn’t very flattering. It could be retouched. I haven’t heard if they will or not.
Why are you putting words in mouth? I don’t expect anything except a respectful photo.
A flattering photo is lighting, angles and other stuff. Anyone who has reviewed a stack of proofs knows what I’m talking about. Usually several are rejected just by looking through the pile. People are very sensitive about how they look in a photo.
Tubman is an important historical figure. I just want her portrayed in a tasteful way that won’t be the subject of crude jokes.
I hope they use the edited photo that I linked earlier. That one is more respectful of her and her work.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/hundred-59f61856aad52b001088bad3.jpg){kind=link}
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/fifty-59f6182322fa3a0011382b5e.jpg){kind=link}