So the group, "Women on 20s" wants to remove Jackson from the $20 bill and replace him with an important female figure in US history. In a move that will promote general equality in our currency.
Personally, I think this is ridiculous. I would argue that a precedent was set a long time ago to only feature Presidents and/or Founding Fathers on paper currency and until that day comes when we have a female president, no women should be on any US paper money.
I can totally get behind taking Jackson off the $20. Dude was freaking psychotic. And while we're at it, take Grant off the $50, because... Grant. Or perhaps make the $50 only legal tender in liquor stores.
What bugs me is the proposition of replacing Jackson with "a woman". That's tokenism at its worst. You're not looking for accomplishments, you're looking for a pair of ovaries. Make a list of great Americans who deserve to be honored alongside Washington and Lincoln, and if the winner happens to be a woman, good for her! But if not, good for him! In my mind, the greatest American not yet on money isn't a woman, but he is an underrepresented minority: Martin Luther King. My other suggestion would be James Madison, who shows up on stuff curiously seldom for having written the Constitution, but I think too many Founding Fathers on the money might sort of imply that we think it's the only time in our history anything interesting happened.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I could care less about putting women on the bill, but I'm all for getting rid of Jackson. He spit on the supreme court and separation of powers and was more or less responsible for the trail of tears. If he's remembered on currency it should be as reminder of our nation's sins and failures. Perhaps if they started printing it on black paper or something.
So the group, "Women on 20s" wants to remove Jackson from the $20 bill and replace him with an important female figure in US history. In a move that will promote general equality in our currency.
No, that's ******* stupid.
Affirmative action quotas were ruled unconstitutional for a reason. They're not equal. They're the exact freaking opposite of equal. They don't combat discrimination based on race/gender/whatever demographic, they ARE discrimination of exactly that sort.
As Blinking said, if all you're doing is looking for an obligatory pair of ovaries, then all you're doing is reducing a person to whether or not that person has ovaries.
That being said, we have what is an interesting debate on our hands: Who should be on the money?
In my mind, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Hamilton, and Franklin should stay where they are. As for the 20 and the 50, I believe one of those should be Franklin Delano Roosevelt if we're going to switch it up.
As for the other, MLK is a fine choice. We did have Susan B. Anthony on our currency, no reason we shouldn't have Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as well.
Affirmative action quotas were ruled unconstitutional for a reason. They're not equal. They're the exact freaking opposite of equal. They don't combat discrimination based on race/gender/whatever demographic, they ARE discrimination of exactly that sort.
Doesn't South Africans know this to be true. Apparently according to my country so called "constitution" it is not unfair discrimination. There is even now calls for the national energy regulator to fire nearly two thousand skilled workers and artisans solely because there skin colour does not match the national average. Trying to solve the problems of racism or sexism with more racism or sexism does not solve any problems. Annnywho back on topic.
That being said, we have what is an interesting debate on our hands: Who should be on the money?
Go the South African route and just put some pictures of animals on the currency. A grizzly bear, a bison and some deer should do the trick.
I don't like Andrew Jackson being on the $20, but replacing him with a woman just because we don't have any women on our money is actually kind of sexist. Women and men should be held to the same standard. Just like men shouldn't get better treatment than women, women who haven't had the same accomplishments as those men shouldn't be honored over them simply because of their gender.
I personally would replace Jackson with FDR and Grant with Theodore Roosevelt.
Not to mention that we've had women on our currency. Susan B. Anthony and Sacagawea were both featured on the dollar coin.
Granted, it's the dollar coin, which nobody likes, but they still were featured on legal tender.
So far we've got FDR, MLK, Theodore Roosevelt, and James Madison. Anyone else come to mind as a contender for the hypothetically revised 20 and 50 dollar bills?
I'm not really convinced that there's a "tradition" that demands only presidents and nebulous "founding fathers" appear on paper currency (while apparently coinage is free to have anything we want?). There have been a lot of different bank notes, and even though our current money only has those groups, there have been a lot of other figures on money throughout our country's history. We even had Martha Washington on some silver certificates.
I don't buy that we need to pick a woman to be on a bill just for the sake of having a woman, but I do think there are a few women who might deserve to be in the discussion on their actual merit. Abigail Adams and Eleanor Roosevelt stand out. They probably wouldn't be my first choice, but that didn't stop Grant from ending up on the 50. If I were picking other non-presidents, I think Thomas Paine and Frederick Douglass might be in the mix.
I think the Sacajawea Dollar effectively dispels the 'traditions' for who can appear on American currency. I think the real question here is why Andrew Jackson, notable mostly for being responsible for the Trail of Tears, is on our currency at all.
I like the MLK idea, B_S.
Women that I think would be good choices for US currency: Betsy Ross, Eleanor Roosevelt, Harriet Tubman, Clara Barton, Sandra Day O'Connor. I'm partial to Clara Barton, but that's mostly because she founded the American Red Cross. Arguably all are fairly well known American Women who made major contributions the country.
I dunno, it's weird to put a First Lady on there and not her husband. These are both awesome ladies (especially Adams), but if you were to honestly answer the question of who did more for the country, John or Abigail, Franklin or Eleanor, I don't think there'd be much contest.
Part of the bigger problem here is that the U.S. really hasn't had a great independent stateswoman on the level of Jefferson or Lincoln or MLK or Tom Paine. If we were Britain and we were having this conversation, we could be like, "Oh, Elizabeth I and Victoria, boom, done." The monarchy allows a path for at least some women to get into power in a society prejudiced against them, even if only by genetic accident. But sexism + democracy = pure sausage fest.
Well, maybe that's the solution. Forget about whether or not they were politicians, just pick some famous american women.
Anyway, I always liked Susan b. Anthony silver dollars. To bad they didn't catch on.
I support getting rid of Andrew Jackson on the $20, but for completely different reasons.
Jackson had an intense hatred for paper money. The guy is probably rolling over in his grave right now at the fact that his face is on a Federal Reserve Note when a big part of his legacy as president was getting rid of the Second Bank of the US.
Also, to the people bringing up the Trail of Tears: Jackson wasn't the only president that did horrible stuff. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and jailed countless dissidents. FDR confiscated gold and had Japanese-Americans in concentration camps. Yet those guys are on our currency with little to no complaints.
I can totally get behind taking Jackson off the $20. Dude was freaking psychotic. And while we're at it, take Grant off the $50, because... Grant. Or perhaps make the $50 only legal tender in liquor stores.
Really? You want to remove Ulysses Grant? He was one of the most important military leaders in U.S. history and one of the greatest military geniuses of all-time. For ****'s sake, he defeated Robert E. Lee at Vicksburg, arguably one of the most difficult and most important battles of the Civil War. Without him, we would almost definitely not be a country. On top of that, he was a leader of reconstruction and civil rights post-war—he fought hard to protect newly freed slaves, shat all over the KKK, and brokered unprecedented peace with Native Americans. Oh, but the guy fell into alcoholism with a family history of it and after witnessing the bloodiest war in American history in which brothers killed brothers. **** off the $50 bill, then!
I think the Sacajawea Dollar effectively dispels the 'traditions' for who can appear on American currency. I think the real question here is why Andrew Jackson, notable mostly for being responsible for the Trail of Tears, is on our currency at all.
I like the MLK idea, B_S.
Women that I think would be good choices for US currency: Betsy Ross,
Betsy Ross didn't actually make the American flag. That is a legend.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Eleanor Roosevelt didn't do more for the country than FDR did and he isn't on any paper money.
Harriet Tubman
While Harriet Tubman was important, I think it is hard to justify her being on currency before Martin Luther King.
Sandra Day O'Connor.
Putting living people on currency doesn't seem like a good idea and if any supreme court justice is going to get on currency it should be John Marshall.
I can totally get behind taking Jackson off the $20. Dude was freaking psychotic. And while we're at it, take Grant off the $50, because... Grant. Or perhaps make the $50 only legal tender in liquor stores.
Really? You want to remove Ulysses Grant? He was one of the most important military leaders in U.S. history and one of the greatest military geniuses of all-time. For ****'s sake, he defeated Robert E. Lee at Vicksburg, arguably one of the most difficult and most important battles of the Civil War. Without him, we would almost definitely not be a country. On top of that, he was a leader of reconstruction and civil rights post-war—he fought hard to protect newly freed slaves, shat all over the KKK, and brokered unprecedented peace with Native Americans. Oh, but the guy fell into alcoholism with a family history of it and after witnessing the bloodiest war in American history in which brothers killed brothers. **** off the $50 bill, then!
If Eisenhower isn't on a bill for defeating the Nazis, Grant shouldn't be on it for defeating the Confederacy. His administration was also completely corrupt.
If Eisenhower isn't on a bill for defeating the Nazis, Grant shouldn't be on it for defeating the Confederacy. His administration was also completely corrupt.
Hell, I'd be all for putting Eisenhower on a bill if we can find the room for him. Maybe we could replace Jackson with him. I put Grant's service in the Civil War as on par with Eisenhower's. It may be easy to minimize the stakes so many years later, but the continued unity (or even survival) of the nation was not a given.
The point stands that Grant was invaluable to us as a country and was unusually good on civil rights, among other things. People shouldn't be so willfully ignorant by reducing his legacy to his illness. Furthermore, saying his administration was "completely corrupt" is obviously an exaggeration. There were corrupt people surrounding him, but he himself was never directly involved in anything like that. He was fiercely loyal (a result of military discipline and experience in a horrible war) and had trouble seeing corruption in his associates. This was certainly a personal flaw that hurt his legacy, but it does not even come close to compromising his place as one of the most important American leaders ever. He certainly deserves a place on our currency over anyone in the league of Eleanor Roosevelt, Harriet Tubman, or God forbid, Sandra Day O'Connor.
Personally, if we're replacing Jackson, I'd like to see MLK, Jr. or Eisenhower.
Eleanor Roosevelt didn't do more for the country than FDR did and he isn't on any paper money.
Sacagawea could be considered a glorified tour guide. She might not have done more than FDR, but that's a slippery slope. I mean, we have Hamilton on the $10 and he's most famous for dueling Burr. I think Eleanor did enough to be considered on her own merits.
Putting living people on currency doesn't seem like a good idea and if any supreme court justice is going to get on currency it should be John Marshall.
While I agree with you, I'm not necessarily talking today. Not to be morbid, but there's a fair chance she'll change categories in a decade or so. But on reflection (I was throwing out famous names), I think you might be right.
Also, am I to assume you've no argument against Barton? She was kind of awesome.
If Eisenhower isn't on a bill for defeating the Nazis, Grant shouldn't be on it for defeating the Confederacy. His administration was also completely corrupt.
Hell, I'd be all for putting Eisenhower on a bill if we can find the room for him. Maybe we could replace Jackson with him. I put Grant's service in the Civil War as on par with Eisenhower's. It may be easy to minimize the stakes so many years later, but the continued unity (or even survival) of the nation was not a given.
The point stands that Grant was invaluable to us as a country and was unusually good on civil rights, among other things. People shouldn't be so willfully ignorant by reducing his legacy to his illness. Furthermore, saying his administration was "completely corrupt" is obviously an exaggeration. There were corrupt people surrounding him, but he himself was never directly involved in anything like that. He was fiercely loyal (a result of military discipline and experience in a horrible war) and had trouble seeing corruption in his associates. This was certainly a personal flaw that hurt his legacy, but it does not even come close to compromising his place as one of the most important American leaders ever. He certainly deserves a place on our currency over anyone in the league of Eleanor Roosevelt, Harriet Tubman, or God forbid, Sandra Day O'Connor.
Personally, if we're replacing Jackson, I'd like to see MLK, Jr. or Eisenhower.
I agree that he deserves to be on currency more than most of the female candidates that have been suggested, but I would say that Theodore Roosevelt deserves to be on it more than him (FDR does too, but he still has the dime).
That being said, we have what is an interesting debate on our hands: Who should be on the money?
Go the South African route and just put some pictures of animals on the currency. A grizzly bear, a bison and some deer should do the trick.
I'm all for this. At the least, gender equality in US currency wouldn't have to be an issue anymore for anyone. At best, the world would finally accept Bison Dollars as legal tender.
http://www.womenon20s.org/
Personally, I think this is ridiculous. I would argue that a precedent was set a long time ago to only feature Presidents and/or Founding Fathers on paper currency and until that day comes when we have a female president, no women should be on any US paper money.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
Well, except for Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton.
Opps, right. Presidents and Founding fathers?
PS, in case anyone wants to mention it, I don't care about the $10,000 bill.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
What bugs me is the proposition of replacing Jackson with "a woman". That's tokenism at its worst. You're not looking for accomplishments, you're looking for a pair of ovaries. Make a list of great Americans who deserve to be honored alongside Washington and Lincoln, and if the winner happens to be a woman, good for her! But if not, good for him! In my mind, the greatest American not yet on money isn't a woman, but he is an underrepresented minority: Martin Luther King. My other suggestion would be James Madison, who shows up on stuff curiously seldom for having written the Constitution, but I think too many Founding Fathers on the money might sort of imply that we think it's the only time in our history anything interesting happened.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Affirmative action quotas were ruled unconstitutional for a reason. They're not equal. They're the exact freaking opposite of equal. They don't combat discrimination based on race/gender/whatever demographic, they ARE discrimination of exactly that sort.
As Blinking said, if all you're doing is looking for an obligatory pair of ovaries, then all you're doing is reducing a person to whether or not that person has ovaries.
That being said, we have what is an interesting debate on our hands: Who should be on the money?
In my mind, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Hamilton, and Franklin should stay where they are. As for the 20 and the 50, I believe one of those should be Franklin Delano Roosevelt if we're going to switch it up.
As for the other, MLK is a fine choice. We did have Susan B. Anthony on our currency, no reason we shouldn't have Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as well.
Doesn't South Africans know this to be true. Apparently according to my country so called "constitution" it is not unfair discrimination. There is even now calls for the national energy regulator to fire nearly two thousand skilled workers and artisans solely because there skin colour does not match the national average. Trying to solve the problems of racism or sexism with more racism or sexism does not solve any problems. Annnywho back on topic.
Go the South African route and just put some pictures of animals on the currency. A grizzly bear, a bison and some deer should do the trick.
Wha? You guys put Mandela on all your money.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I personally would replace Jackson with FDR and Grant with Theodore Roosevelt.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Granted, it's the dollar coin, which nobody likes, but they still were featured on legal tender.
So far we've got FDR, MLK, Theodore Roosevelt, and James Madison. Anyone else come to mind as a contender for the hypothetically revised 20 and 50 dollar bills?
I don't buy that we need to pick a woman to be on a bill just for the sake of having a woman, but I do think there are a few women who might deserve to be in the discussion on their actual merit. Abigail Adams and Eleanor Roosevelt stand out. They probably wouldn't be my first choice, but that didn't stop Grant from ending up on the 50. If I were picking other non-presidents, I think Thomas Paine and Frederick Douglass might be in the mix.
I like the MLK idea, B_S.
Women that I think would be good choices for US currency: Betsy Ross, Eleanor Roosevelt, Harriet Tubman, Clara Barton, Sandra Day O'Connor. I'm partial to Clara Barton, but that's mostly because she founded the American Red Cross. Arguably all are fairly well known American Women who made major contributions the country.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Part of the bigger problem here is that the U.S. really hasn't had a great independent stateswoman on the level of Jefferson or Lincoln or MLK or Tom Paine. If we were Britain and we were having this conversation, we could be like, "Oh, Elizabeth I and Victoria, boom, done." The monarchy allows a path for at least some women to get into power in a society prejudiced against them, even if only by genetic accident. But sexism + democracy = pure sausage fest.
Let's be fair, he did a lot of stuff. Much of it was horrible. Some of it was even worse. But one thing Jackson definitely was not was a one-note guy.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Anyway, I always liked Susan b. Anthony silver dollars. To bad they didn't catch on.
Jackson had an intense hatred for paper money. The guy is probably rolling over in his grave right now at the fact that his face is on a Federal Reserve Note when a big part of his legacy as president was getting rid of the Second Bank of the US.
Also, to the people bringing up the Trail of Tears: Jackson wasn't the only president that did horrible stuff. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and jailed countless dissidents. FDR confiscated gold and had Japanese-Americans in concentration camps. Yet those guys are on our currency with little to no complaints.
Really? You want to remove Ulysses Grant? He was one of the most important military leaders in U.S. history and one of the greatest military geniuses of all-time. For ****'s sake, he defeated Robert E. Lee at Vicksburg, arguably one of the most difficult and most important battles of the Civil War. Without him, we would almost definitely not be a country. On top of that, he was a leader of reconstruction and civil rights post-war—he fought hard to protect newly freed slaves, shat all over the KKK, and brokered unprecedented peace with Native Americans. Oh, but the guy fell into alcoholism with a family history of it and after witnessing the bloodiest war in American history in which brothers killed brothers. **** off the $50 bill, then!
Betsy Ross didn't actually make the American flag. That is a legend.
Eleanor Roosevelt didn't do more for the country than FDR did and he isn't on any paper money.
While Harriet Tubman was important, I think it is hard to justify her being on currency before Martin Luther King.
Putting living people on currency doesn't seem like a good idea and if any supreme court justice is going to get on currency it should be John Marshall.
If Eisenhower isn't on a bill for defeating the Nazis, Grant shouldn't be on it for defeating the Confederacy. His administration was also completely corrupt.
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Hell, I'd be all for putting Eisenhower on a bill if we can find the room for him. Maybe we could replace Jackson with him. I put Grant's service in the Civil War as on par with Eisenhower's. It may be easy to minimize the stakes so many years later, but the continued unity (or even survival) of the nation was not a given.
The point stands that Grant was invaluable to us as a country and was unusually good on civil rights, among other things. People shouldn't be so willfully ignorant by reducing his legacy to his illness. Furthermore, saying his administration was "completely corrupt" is obviously an exaggeration. There were corrupt people surrounding him, but he himself was never directly involved in anything like that. He was fiercely loyal (a result of military discipline and experience in a horrible war) and had trouble seeing corruption in his associates. This was certainly a personal flaw that hurt his legacy, but it does not even come close to compromising his place as one of the most important American leaders ever. He certainly deserves a place on our currency over anyone in the league of Eleanor Roosevelt, Harriet Tubman, or God forbid, Sandra Day O'Connor.
Personally, if we're replacing Jackson, I'd like to see MLK, Jr. or Eisenhower.
Sacagawea could be considered a glorified tour guide. She might not have done more than FDR, but that's a slippery slope. I mean, we have Hamilton on the $10 and he's most famous for dueling Burr. I think Eleanor did enough to be considered on her own merits.
While I agree with you, I'm not necessarily talking today. Not to be morbid, but there's a fair chance she'll change categories in a decade or so. But on reflection (I was throwing out famous names), I think you might be right.
Also, am I to assume you've no argument against Barton? She was kind of awesome.
That was unfair of me, you're right.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
I agree that he deserves to be on currency more than most of the female candidates that have been suggested, but I would say that Theodore Roosevelt deserves to be on it more than him (FDR does too, but he still has the dime).
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.