Yes, and black Americans became fully equal citizens in 1868. /s

You can't judge history and civil rights off of the exceptions or the ideas written on paper. I'm sorry. Acting like this is what the meme is talking about is just denying centuries of patriarchy in America.

The article literally says

the Equal Credit Opportunity Act passed (1974), which, among other things, required banks to consider credit applications in a woman’s own name regardless of marital status

Gee, I wonder why a very specific act had to be passed to deal with this "non existent" issue that was solved in the 1700s. Gee. Weird.

Though, again, depending on where you lived, you may have already been protected from that discrimination by state law for deposit accounts in technicality if not practice.

Just an absolute garbage article you linked. Seriously. Reconsider your ability to think critically if you can't understand how much this article is trying to downplay patriarchy from this quote alone.

Women were still largely dependent on being married and dependent on their husband to have any form of banking well into the timeline the meme is referring to. That article is like saying "I couldn't find a law specific to race in the Jim Crow South related to voting".

I don't mean to overuse the analogy of racial discrimination. But I feel like people don't actually understand how discrimination and laws actually work in reality when it comes to patriarchy. So, I'm hoping you at least understand it for other historical contexts.

Laws aren't written to be "X identity group can't do Y". And trying to analyze the actual material outcomes by only looking for laws like that is going to give you the results the article you linked came to.

Laws of discrimination are written to be vague enough that the powers of white supremacy and patriarchy are allowed to be enacted at individual levels on mass scale - without directly writing them down.

Edit: this was originally just the /s comment. But holy shit that article they linked was so bad and ahistorical I couldn't stop editing. Seriously. Please learn to think about what you're reading. Don't just upvote a comment because they had a "source".

Just one random counter example: wiki/First Women's Bank (New York):

It opened in 1975 and was part of a broader movement to address the financial needs of women who faced barriers in obtaining credit and financial services from traditional banks.

There was enough of a need for this 50 years ago that it made literal capitalist financial interest to make it happen.

Financial freedom in a modern word can be privileged (but absolutely essential for actual survival) and groups (like women, ie half of humanity) can be denied the necessities. If a women needs a man's signature to get a loan, have a credit card, or even open a banking account, they are not free from that man. And that (one aspect) really changed only in the 80s (slowly & with newer gens).

Saying some women had bank amounts in the 1700s is like saying "land of the free" in reference to USA (at any point in history actually).
Or saying how racism in USA ended with a (any) specific law.

The "meme" is still funny in comparing a basic necessity for a majority vs bcs ofc not a notable % of any human groups have been to space (even including billionaires).

It's a good link, busting the myth clearly and with good sources.

However:

1862: First state (California) allows women to open bank accounts regardless of marital status.

But that's still a century before female cosmonauts, so I'm just being pernicketty really.

Wish I could upvote things more than once lol. Idk how many things I'm banned from cuz I called out the user CowBee for being a state paid poster or bot or something. 2 years, 18k comments or something insane like that. All shilling for the CCP in China. Mod there must also mod other places.

This was a great read, thanks!

But can they vote in USA in 2028?

The working class was able to vote in election once the Tsars were removed, and the ballot extended to the bourgeoisie and land owners in 1937

Not sure about Soviet Union but in communist Poland people had lots of money. They just didn't have anything to buy with them.

lot of people say it was fine, they had a home, food, work etc. does that mean it was roses and glitter, most certainly not but then go walk through a homeless encampment in the US.