Women’s rights are still frightening (especially to men) From women’s suffrage to modern red flags: why questioning gender rights threatens democracy

Democracy can also, indeed above all, be measured by the way it speaks about itself and its founding principles. In recent days, during a session of the Formigine City Council (in the province of Modena, Italy), the discussion about the 80th anniversary of women’s suffrage took an unexpected and chilling turn.

The statement that shook the debate

Costantino Righi Riva, city councilor and former center-right mayoral candidate, declared that the recognition of women’s right to vote in 1946 was initially perceived as “an attack on family unity.” He went on to argue that later laws on divorce, abortion, and the reform of family law merely confirmed this supposed “erosion” of traditional values. These remarks, made in the context of a motion calling for initiatives to celebrate this historic milestone, immediately triggered strong political and cultural reactions at both the local and national levels.

Why the issue is broader

Righi Riva’s words touch on the raw nerves of a deeper debate about identity, gender, the political role of women, and historical memory. Those who deny or downplay the importance of hard-won civil rights, such as universal suffrage, often reveal a sense of insecurity toward gender equality. This inevitably generates ideological red flags, warning signs that deserve to be recognized and analyzed. In a pluralist society, it is healthy to discuss how family, society, and work evolve over time. However, denying the historical importance of fundamental civil achievements is not simply an opinion; it is an attempt to rewrite their value. This is where the responsibility of those who occupy public space comes into play: institutional representatives cannot question human rights without risking the normalization of regressive worldviews.

How to read and respond to cultural red flags like these

When a statement touches sensitive issues such as women’s rights, it is useful to adopt a few interpretative keys:

1. Historical context: understanding that women’s suffrage was not a “mistake” but a step forward toward universal democracy. Denying it means misunderstanding not only History, but the very nature of civil rights.
2. Risk of oversimplification: statements like those heard in Formigine tend to compress complex debates, on abortion, family, work, and political participation, into polarizing slogans. As a result, the quality of public discourse suffers.
3. Civic and digital education: citizens, especially young people, must be equipped to recognize regressive rhetoric when it presents itself as “free opinion.”
4. Spaces for constructive dialogue: to avoid unnecessary polarization, it is crucial to promote public meetings, readings, and debates on gender achievements and rights, explaining why certain rights were recognized and what obstacles still remain.

Why it matters to talk about it

At a time when information spreads rapidly on social media and every statement can go viral, it is essential not to take the value of acquired rights for granted. Discussing these topics, both in traditional media and on social platforms, helps to:

• highlight distortions that can emerge in public debate
• educate new generations to recognize dangerous rhetoric
• showcase positive examples of civic engagement
• stimulate a deeper cultural conversation about gender relations in the 21st century

The democratic history of Italy cannot be reduced to slogans, nor can civil rights be framed as mistakes. For this reason, it is vital to engage with these issues with rigor, responsibility, and above all, a strong sense of community. And beware: a red flag like Costantino Righi Riva might show up on Hinge, too. Being ready to recognize them in order to protect ourselves is an important step.