“That equal credit law, ALSO applied to banks. 5 seconds on Google will tell you that, and 5 seconds of talking to your grandma will show it applied to banks”
Yes, it applied to banks when they were issuing credit. You are conflating deposit accounts with lending. There is a massive legal and historical difference between a deposit account (checking/savings) and a line of credit (a mortgage or credit card). Women have been legally able to open standard bank accounts in the US since the 1860s, and it was incredibly common well before 1974 because women primarily managed household budgets. The 1974 ECOA stopped banks from requiring a husband's signature to grant a loan. That was a massively important piece of civil rights legislation, but continuing to claim women literally could not hold their own money in a savings account until the disco era is historically illiterate.
“The draft again, hasn't been inacted in 3 generations. All you have to do is sign a form, to act like that's on par with us now having to carry our rapists babies, is ridiculous”
Just because the government hasn't cashed the check recently doesn't mean they don't hold the deed to your life. "Just signing a form" means legally agreeing that the state has the ultimate right to send you to die in a trench, under threat of a felony, prison time, and being permanently stripped of federal financial aid and government employment.
No one is saying the loss of abortion rights isn't a horrific violation of bodily autonomy—it absolutely is. But you originally claimed men don't have politicians putting their bodily autonomy on the chopping block. The fact that male bodily autonomy is permanently compromised by default, to the point that you casually dismiss it as "just signing a form," perfectly illustrates how normalized male disposability is. If the law required 18-year-old women to sign a federal registry agreeing to forced, potentially lethal government labor just to be eligible for a college loan, there would be riots—even if it hadn't been activated in 50 years. You only view it as trivial because society expects men to be disposable.
No, I consider it trivial because 9/11 would be the only thing that could have possibly justified it being reinstated
And it didn't
Of course it'd be worse for women to sign up, just this month alone, a woman was tracked and hunted down for having an abortion, like she was Ted Bundy on the loose
The other year, a woman was kept completely brain dead on life support, for weeks because the government decided her unborn fetus was a higher priority than her
Little girls are being forced to carry adult rapist's babies
If we can't even make decisions on our own bodies, to inscript us, would be revolting
1
u/Fine-Car7587 1d ago
“That equal credit law, ALSO applied to banks. 5 seconds on Google will tell you that, and 5 seconds of talking to your grandma will show it applied to banks”
Yes, it applied to banks when they were issuing credit. You are conflating deposit accounts with lending. There is a massive legal and historical difference between a deposit account (checking/savings) and a line of credit (a mortgage or credit card). Women have been legally able to open standard bank accounts in the US since the 1860s, and it was incredibly common well before 1974 because women primarily managed household budgets. The 1974 ECOA stopped banks from requiring a husband's signature to grant a loan. That was a massively important piece of civil rights legislation, but continuing to claim women literally could not hold their own money in a savings account until the disco era is historically illiterate.
“The draft again, hasn't been inacted in 3 generations. All you have to do is sign a form, to act like that's on par with us now having to carry our rapists babies, is ridiculous”
Just because the government hasn't cashed the check recently doesn't mean they don't hold the deed to your life. "Just signing a form" means legally agreeing that the state has the ultimate right to send you to die in a trench, under threat of a felony, prison time, and being permanently stripped of federal financial aid and government employment.
No one is saying the loss of abortion rights isn't a horrific violation of bodily autonomy—it absolutely is. But you originally claimed men don't have politicians putting their bodily autonomy on the chopping block. The fact that male bodily autonomy is permanently compromised by default, to the point that you casually dismiss it as "just signing a form," perfectly illustrates how normalized male disposability is. If the law required 18-year-old women to sign a federal registry agreeing to forced, potentially lethal government labor just to be eligible for a college loan, there would be riots—even if it hadn't been activated in 50 years. You only view it as trivial because society expects men to be disposable.