Since 1 September, Austria has banned headscarves for female pupils under 14 at state and private schools. Repeated breaches of the rule could lead to fines of €150 to €800 for parents.
Since the start of the 2026/27 school year on 1 September, female pupils in Austria under the age of 14 have been prohibited from wearing any headscarf at school that “covers the head in line with Islamic traditions.”
Teachers’ representatives say the new rule has generally been implemented calmly and respectfully. At the same time, some schools have reported conflicts and, in some cases, aggressive reactions.
The new law was already controversial before it came into force, with critics questioning whether it was compatible with freedom of religion and the principle of equality.
Just let women decide what the fuck they want to wear. These laws do the opposite of that, and they are fully aware, because it has never been about women’s rights to begin with. It has always been racism.
Read the article. It only applies to under 14 year olds so they are old enough to decide and not forced by they’re patents superstition.
Yeah, I get OP’s point, but here in the Midwest we have our own “headscarf” wearing people, we call them Amish. There ain’t no way in hell those kids wear those tight bonnets in the summer by choice.
I would hope these are more comfortable to wear since they come from hotter climates, but I don’t think asking people to put off forcing religious clothing onto their kids is too much to ask.
It is so much better to be forced what to wear or not wear by the fucking government. Do you hear yourself?
While religion itself is a disaster, this is unambiguously targetting one religion in particular and will not have positive effects.
What about other traditions? Why single out Islam?
Continued singling out of Islam will lead to Christofascism, as Christianity will seem like an exceptional religion, incapable of anything bad.
Yes the traditional headdress of Christians should be banned as well.
You’re joking, but an equivalent ban would be on wearing crosses, or removing distinct Christian architectural features like church and cathedral towers/bells.
Not really. The original intention of the head scarf isn’t religious expression like wearing a cross is. It would be more like banning religious dress that forbids any exposed skin beneath the neck besides the hands like some christian cults do. The original reasoning for wearing a cross was to signal to other christians that you were a christian. What is the original reasoning for girls to cover their hair?
If you’re looking at original reasoning for allowing or banning religious practices, you’d have to ban it all because there’s no logic to any of it. This is about religious freedom.
If you are concerned that religious communities are controlling or oppressive, the thing to do is to provide access to education and wealth opportunities, not try to force them to change their behaviors with laws that will only make them more insular and resistant to liberal cultures. Let them be free to practice their religion how they see fit, but also expose them to different ideas so they can actually have a choice.
Religious freedom doesn’t include the freedom to oppress. I’m perfectly fine banning all oppressive religious practices.
How would you ban religious architecture only for under-14 year olds?
Seriously, just blanket ban all religious symbols and references—crosses, yarmulkes, star and crescent, head coverings, etc.—and call it a day. You go to school to learn, not to indoctrinate.
Idk have u ever thought Austria isn’t a Muslim country ? Or that islam isn’t on par on human value with other religions. I ask a christian if rape is bad he will agree A Muslim can simply said my religion comme before your law. Still havent saw one Muslim condamn Mohamed cause he raped a 9yo. Won’t even start on his military conquest and his religious law that allow you to out the vainquish in slavery and sexual exploitation. Which happened quite a lot. 60% of french Muslim said their religious law prevail on country law.
The Christian extremists in the White House are much worse, thanks to the aforementioned Christian exceptionalism.
Many Christian fundamentalists might say “Rape is bad”, but then define rape as something done by perverted men in dark back alleys, in masks, everything else is not real rape and the woman deserves it. This conveniently gives them a free pass, but can be used against immigrants.
Muslim fundamentalists are the same. It’s the same fucking religion. The Abrahamic religions are all terrible. Islam deserves the same criticism as Christianity. Yes Muslims shouldn’t be discriminated but that doesn’t mean you have to defend Islam by calling Christianity a worse religion, they both suck.
It isn’t. Islam is the worst and by far. Your statement simply tell anybody that you dont know anything on the subject
They both suck. Fuck all Abrahamists.
Which one tell u to rape and enslave the non believer ?
Its unreal that u try to say the two are equivalent
Dont care didn’t ask. We r talking about Austria, America isn’t the center of the world. Also american christian aren’t european christian. So you can keep your whataboutism
I didn’t know PiS and Fidesz were Obama-liberal Christians…
Looking at your original comment IR seem u gonna be mad for a long time. So let’s do do this quickly
Human value
Christian > islam
Respect of ppl that doesn’t believe in the same faith
Christian > Islam
Not my fault if the pedophile of the desert that invented a religion to justify having a harem and slave wasn’t as altruist as other. Cope
“Obama said «Love thy neighbor» meant «freedom of religion», so that means the NSDAP 2.0 claiming to be Christian is pro freedom of religion, when they say they’ll force Christianity into schools it means they’ll put more freedom of religion there! Obama was a Christian, therefore every Christian is a liberal! If they’re not, then they’re fake Christians! We don’t need secularism, we need Super Obama, who is even more liberal and more Christian (therefore supporting more freedom of religion), I am a very politically literate person!”
Jokes aside I know just as many Christians who interpret the “turn the other cheek” part as a call to nonaggression, as those who think it means the people below them (this line came from the context of slavery) have to immediately surrender the moment they’re attacking them.
How many Muslim do u know that condamn the fact that their prophet was a pedophile? Or that it s litteraly written that u must submit non believer by force. That u can take all they have rape them and put them in slavery?
I’m not arguing Christianity is perfect but fucking hell how can u refute that islam is worse by every metrics ?
This will only help to marginalize different parts of the society. It is no different to pitting them against each other.
I am not a fan of headscarf on children, the whole philosophy of it is quite sickening to be honest. But I have seen enough to know this won’t help girls become independent individuals who can think for themselves and don’t submit all their life to other men.
If the ban is intended to stop children from feeling pressured to dress in a way that conforms to their family’s religion, why does it only target islam and not extend to other religious garments or accessories (e.g. kippah, turban, crucifix)?
Because headscarves are the most oppressive, by far. None of the other things cover you up that much and prohibit you from expressing yourself. Also, how many Christan parents force their kids to wear a crucifix? Barely any, so no debate necessary.
so no debate necessary.
People only say stuff like this when they have a weak argument that won’t stand up to scrutiny. What about a trans kid with Christian parents, do you think they’re allowed to dress how they want? Do you think they’re also facing oppression even if it isn’t so readily apparent? Other religions also dictate how you’re supposed to dress, how to cut your hair, and how you can express yourself so they should all be included too.
If this rule change isn’t going to affect that many kids because their parents dont force them to wear religious attire, then it should be a no-brainer to include them too since there would be little pushback.
I will add that other groups, like trans women from middle eastern backgrounds for example, do also wear head covering to feel more feminine and in line with their real gender too.
I myself still wear black covid masks because it hides the 5-o’clock shadow and feels more feminine. This would be illegal in Austria under “Prohibition on the Covering of the Face” (originally targeting niqabs)
Overall governments placing rules on what people can and can’t wear is a red flag. The only exception I understand is nazi tattoos.
Nazi tatoo totally understandable. The ideology responsable of 95% of religious terrorism nan bro that s too far. Have u any idea how you sound to real person ?
Muslim majority countries are targeted by Islamic terrorists overwhelmingly more than any.
And ? Religious terrorism is acceptable when it target Muslim? What are u trying to say
Also source for your number since it s totally fabricated and take into account military conflict that aren’t qualify as terrorism yet the number is 70%.
Wait, I haven’t been 16 for a long time, I can read peoples’ post history and block troll accounts now!
The most oppressive hat. Take a pill.
Yup, I agree.
That said, even if it’s only one religion being targeted now, it’s better that some are free from misogynistic religious oppression rather than none, in my view.
The government says the main goal is to protect children’s development and their freedom to develop as individuals, arguing that girls should be protected from potential family or social pressure to wear a headscarf.
If that is really the objective, then make domestic religious coercion liable to incur fines and institute mechanisms for kids to safely report coercion and for protecting and defending the choices of girls. You force your daughter to wear something against her will? She reports it to a safe adult at school and you get a visit from child services. The same mechanisms of course should be in place for protecting kids from bullying, domestic violence, atheist kids, queer and trans kids, kids whose parents are far right extremists, kids who support a different football team than their dads, metalhead kids, etc. Protecting kids is uncontroversial.
Such a great idea. Already in place regarding genital mutilation which is far simpler to rule cause it s de facto illegal and concmsent is impossible at that age and yet this type of precaution does nothing for one simple reason. Theses people are Muslim citizen before being citizen of the place they live. All their social life happen inside Muslim ideology. It s litteraly grooming
I don’t think decisions made in this manner have a very simple correct answer. For example, the commandment in Islam for women to cover themselves is intended for after women reach adulthood. But suppose this person has a religion, and this religion requires girls to wear a headscarf from birth. In that case, this situation may be compatible with equality but contrary to freedom. But if persons who are not yet of legal age are under their parents’ responsibility while also being under the state’s responsibility, then in this case will they be subject to two separate legal systems: the rules in state buildings and the rules at home and in public space? In this situation, it is difficult to choose a side.
Every time I see a ban like this, I have to wonder how many families did the math and decided that their girls actually don’t need an education outside the home, or their wife doesn’t need a job or to go grocery shopping herself, and all of them will just have to rely on their male relatives their whole lives to take care of them. Policies that force people to dress outside of their cultural acceptability leads to isolation, not integration.
Should oppressive cultural traditions be tolerated?
Doesn’t that just reinforce that these veils are a form of oppression, if the girls and woman can be banned from leaving the home without them?
Except, in Europe it’s usually mandatory to take your kid to school until a certain age and home schooling is usually not an option.
I have quickly checked and unfortunately Austria does allow homeschooling. So the concern of isolation is sadly not entirely unjustified.
The conditions for that to be allowed are incredibly strict, effectively its not allowed
And guess what? This literally just happened last week in Flanders in Belgium.
Girls were rounded up and publically stripped in front of administrators.
Now they can’t go to school but it is illegal to stay home, but the schools are also completely full so they aren’t allowed to enroll I’m another school that doesn’t publically strip them.
It’s fucked. But of course, all other religions can wear whatever they want as long as they are not brown people.
Wait do you have a source for this? I tried looking for one but can only find something about a Muslim teacher who got fired for wearing a headscarf (also despicable, but a different story I think)
It’s illegal to not send your children to school so the cops can come and pick you up.
These laws encourage communities to establish their own private schools, so that their kids are no longer targeted by this kind of fascist intrusion by the state.
They can’t and if they do there are standards that the state controls.
This is not a fascist intrusion this is ensuring children a half decent chance to have a secular education with science, chance to get a job etc. What are you even on about?
Good points you raise there. Therefore further measures are required to prevent said isolating consequences.
Probably less than the number that decided enforcing an oppressive style of dress wasn’t worth the hassle when faced with minimal societal pressure.
But like, if it’s cold out and I wrap my scarf around my head, is that ok? Why not?
The ban is for indoors
If you’re not Muslim, you can wear what you want.
If you’re wearing hijab to hide alopecia or chemotherapy-induced hair loss, that’s fine, so long as you’re not also brown. Hell, if you’re not Muslim, you can go ahead and wear hijab on a bad hair day.
That’s fine under this law because it directly targets Muslim religious observance.
Why is the head scarf a religious observance? Like what’s the origin and purpose of it? What percentage of Muslims adhere to that particular observance?
They wanna increase that to 70%
If not for religion, banning a scarf would be universally seen as inane.
Update: I somehow misunderstood ‘inane’ as ‘mundane’. So ignore my comment.
IDK… I think banning a regular scarf, without religious meaning is weird. There may be any reasons for wearing them. Cold weather, covering up something that might look bad, or just because it looks cool.Banning shoes indoors or on carpets because of dirt, fine, but otherwise, its like reverse indecency laws…I think that’s the point he’s trying to make
The exact wording isn’t clear, but if it really is just Islamic clothing, then it’s a bad law.
If it were more generalized, such as “no one under 14 is allowed to follow religion enforced dress codes, such as…” Which also included dresses, skullcaps, head coverings of all kinds, etc. inside of a school, that would be a lot more reasonable.
But a law targeting one religion, and ignoring others, just reeks of bigotry.
Agreed.
Actually the law you described would suck ass as well.
I’d be for it, religious indoctrination and gas lighting kids is nothing but abuse. i’d raise the age to 18 though.
Ah yes, enlightened lemmy atheist reinvents American Indian Boarding Schools.
Oh wow, you’re so smart and edgy 😮
You support the religious indoctrination of children?
When removing the bigotry makes it a bad law, it’s a bad law.
If you disagree, you should say why you disagree, so that your comment is constructive to the discussion.
It was a destructive comment, a cliche. Feel free to ignore it.
deleted by creator
Writing vagueness into your law just allows for selective enforcement.
Guess what groups would be targeted?
The same ones that are currently being targetted…?
Bingo.
That law would also be terrible not to mention it would be like similar laws like French Laïcité be very discriminatory enforced to target minorities.
Sure. Although I would argue that hijabs are a bit more pronounced in terms of oppressive clothing than, let’s say a simple dress.
Therefore I count this as a win in my book. Leave superstitious habits where they belong: in private, at home.
Then they will wear them at home. And they will never leave the home, because the law prohibits them from leaving home in the garb required of their religion.
You and I can call this clothing oppressive, but in prohibiting her from wearing it, we are also her oppressers.
Watch the average Liberal agree with far right parties because they are racist again.
Head scarves laws/rules are not “racist”, please try again.
Once again, how about banning the Kippah, and uncut locks? Or would banning Jewish religious symbols suddenly be problematic to you? The state doesn’t get to pick favorites. Public education must be neutral to all faiths, and provide a secular curriculum. That’s the only viable and just path towards a free and fair secular society.
Not necessarily, but in practice, almost always. There is no other motivation. They don’t want parents to be able to indoctrinate children into the parent’s own culture and instead want the children to be indoctrinated with their own culture. That’s not just racism, it’s a form of cultural genocide. We know a lot about that here in Canada.
100% of users called Mulligrubs are racist. That is not a personal attack.
Right, they should follow up with a kippah ban for boys for the goal “to protect children’s development and their freedom to develop as individuals” /s
I would be completely up for that. Also, ban pedocircumcision
They absolutely should. If hats are banned, that includes fezzes and little felt ones.
They should just ban all kinds of hats inside. Even a baseball hat is disrespectful
Sexist and racist nonsense targeted to control women and punish minorities.
They tried a similar thing with hiring teachers in Konya for a bit where I lived and result was that the nearby schools just ended up unfairly hiring more men than women.
Exactly. Good thing then that this ban was enacted, since this may help a little to not punish children and loosen control over women.
Loosen control over women by controlling what women are allowed to wear because the clothing she wants to wear comes from a culture that controls what women are allowed to wear. Great job liberating women from having to make their own choices, you’re such a hero.
I wish the government will ban you from wearing a hat, I don’t like it when men wearing hats.
I mean, if my religious parents were forcing me to wear a hat for religious reasons, I’d gladly welcome that law.
I thought girls weren’t required by Islam to wear headscarfs until that age anyway?
This is an assumption, but I guess this depends on exactly what Islam branch is being followed. Some are more extreme than others, so I guess those might force it.
Some will say they aren’t requires at all other will put it around the age of 3.
Yes
