Interesting?

Question

I just came across a few 1998 articles about bank practices. Do you realize that in 1973 ( that is only 34 years ago!!) married women were not issued credit cards in their own name? That most women could not get a bank loan without a male co-signer?

Amazing is it not? Thank goodness times are changing. Slowly but surely in my opinion! :)

Tera here is an article about it:

http://www.americancatholic.org/messenger/jul1998/Editorial.asp

hope it comes in.

I also decided to look up a few more things, it is very interesting to know that most things we as women take for granted today were not available to us just a few years ago.

Angie V: You are so right. It seems like the years are just speeding by. One of my favorite quotes is : “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” George Santayana

That says it all I think.

Chicago that is so interesting! ( And good for her!!) :) What bank did she bank with? I would love to know! Exceptions to every rule do exist and I love to hear about them! :)

Jan4: Thanks for the story! :)

I find it interesting that some people do not realize that just because some women did get credit cards or loans, did not mean it was the norm in the early 60's to middle 70's.

In the past, women were systematically denied credit regardless of whether they would be able to repay their loans. It was not uncommon for bankers to refuse to consider a married woman's income when a couple applied for a loan or a mortgage. Banks made the assumption that a woman of childbearing age was an automatic credit risk.

Single women had greater difficulty than single men in obtaining credit, particularly home mortgages. Creditors were also reluctant to extend credit to married women in their own names and refused to count a woman's income when calculating the creditworthiness of a married couple. Women also had a difficult time reestablishing credit upon divorce or widowhood.

More than half of the states currently have enacted statutes proscribing discrimination based upon sex or marital status.

In 1974, Congress enacted the Federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act , which prohibits credit discrimination based not only upon sex and marital status, but also upon race, religion, and national origin. It has, however, very detailed prohibitions against discrimination based upon sex and marital status. Creditors are not permitted to (1) assign a value to sex or marital status in calculating an applicant's creditworthiness; (2) assign a value to having a telephone in the name of the applicant; (3) question a married couple's childbearing plan; (4) alter the terms of credit or require a reapplication when there is a change in an individual's marital status; (5) refuse to consider the total income of an applicant and a spouse; (6) delay action on an application or refuse to consider it; and (7) discourage an individual from making an application for credit.

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1975 prohibits banks, stores, and other organizations from discriminating on the basis of sex or marital status when making loans or granting credit. Since all credit was in the husband's name, divorced women and widows, after 20 or more years of marriage, were automatically denied credit when it was discovered that they had "no" credit history. Even those who were financially independent were considered poor credit risks. After all, there was always the chance they might quit their jobs to have babies or to care for young children.

Women have a right to credit in their own names without regard to their husband's income or credit. This act gives the woman with an income of her own the right to be deemed credit worthy based on her earnings, her history, and her paying of bills. It is the non-discriminatory right to give credit where credit is due. Cosigners can't be required. Each person is now evaluated on the type of job they have. Marital status can't be a factor to issue or not issue a credit card or charge account. No questions can be asked about children. In community property states you must have the other spouse's signature on the credit application.

As of June 1, 1977, if both husband and wife are authorized, the application must be in both names. Prior to that, credit bureaus had no history that a married woman existed, let alone paid bills. A married woman may have handled all the household finance, budgeted all the family's needs, paid all the bills with her own or joint checking account and, in general, made sure all bills were paid on time; but all was attributed to her husband's credit because of all accounts being in his name. As long as they were married, there was no problem. But after divorce or death, the wife had no legal proof that she'd been responsible for paying a dime. No record existed of her ability to pay bills. All accounts were then closed.

Answer 1

lol yup we`ve come a long way,
feel bad for those women back then though!

Answer 2

The woman I married in 1965 had credit cards, a car and a loan, all in her name only. Obviously, your data is incorrect at best.

To add, credit cards are a conditionally recent phenomenon; they did not become very popular with women OR men until the 70's.

During this time, most women did not work outside the home and were dependent upon their husband's income without an income of their own.

A bank would be foolish to loan money to anyone who had no income to repay the loan. Now that women are securing their own income apart from their husbands (working for wages), banks are loaning money simply because these women can be held personally accountable to repay the loan, not because of discrimination.

Even today, banks are reluctant to loan money to anyone who lacks the ability to repay the loan. It's not discrimination, no matter how hard one tries to make it so; it's simple business practice.

Answer 3

Times certainly have changed but we must remain vigilent and ensure women will are not discriminated against. This reminds me of a Wall Street Journal article I read about 3 or 4 years ago. A woman was applying for a loan for business she wanted to start. She sat down with a bank customer service rep and he asked her a few questions. She felt that he wasn't interested in her business plans, and before he declined her for the loan, he asked where her husband was. She's thinking to herself, what does my husband have to do with this? He didn't even suggest she might get the loan if she had a cosigner.

Determined and understandbly peeved about the treatment she just received, she asked another employee if she could speak to a manager if it was possible. The manager agrees to speak with her and she complained about the first person who questioned her. He looks over her application and the next thing you know, the manager approves her for the loan. Your credit score is very important these days. It's the main deciding factor whether a bank wants to lend a person an extension of credit. Apparently she was a good risk, met the bank's qualifications, but the first person had an issue with her being a woman applying for the loan by herself. That manager wouldn't have approved her just because she complained about the first employee's attitude. Banks don't work like that. They would probably reprimand an employee for bad customer service, but they wouldn't reward someone with a loan if they didn't meet their requirements. She was qualified for the loan when the first person told her no. She didn't come back after a few months of trying to build her score up, she was approved less than an hour later.

That woman's story reminds me that we don't need to be complacent about women's rights.

Answer 4

It wasn't until 1920 that women were allowed the vote - that's 10 years after men were allowed to vote, but we won't mention that part.

Anyway, I don't know how - but I know my Mom had credit cards (and we were poor) as did my Nan. My Nan also used to work on the buses (back in the days when women weren't "allowed" to work, allegedly) which is how she met my Grandfather.

Seems there's a lot of... peculiarities about what really did and didn't happen in the past. Perhaps my Grandmother was lying through her teeth when she claimed to have credit and be able to work? Sure, that must be it.

Answer 5

Most of the married women were not working in that time and were not allowed to take decisions on spending. Even advances to household sector was considered as a wasteful expenditure.

Answer 6

I think that in 2007 when everything moves so quickly and things change so fast its super easy to lose historical perspective. Things that feel like ancient history to me really only happened in like 2002 and I'm always shocked. Like wow, that was only 2002?! Like 911 seems forever ago but it wasn't.

Answer 7

What is so bad, a lot of men depend on the woman to establish credit now.

Answer 8

Which part of the world are u from? I'm sure in some part of the world it's still like that especially in some countries where u still have to send a rape victim to prison

Answer 9

Amen, Sister!

Answer 10

I didn't know that, but I think there are still a few things that need to change.