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.

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    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.

    • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      57 minutes ago

      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.

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        41 minutes ago

        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.

  • Avicenna@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    17 minutes ago

    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.

  • Mulligrubs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I’ve been to a few countries, and every one of them have had public dress codes for many decades.

    And businesses have their own rules in addition. No masks here. Masks there. No sunglasses. No nudity. Nude beach. No shirt, no shoes, no service. No thongs. Suit jacket required. Collar shirt required. No offensive t-shirts. No jeans.

    If they wish to a be a part of a society or use a business, do it; if they don’t like the rules there, they can always live/do business somewhere where they find the dress codes appropriate.

    If you know of a country with no legal dress codes, please share where that is.

    • Avicenna@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 minutes ago

      I know a couple countries that tried to change legal dress codes which clearly targeted minorities. It did not end well.

      Also

      And businesses have their own rules in addition. No masks here. Masks there. No sunglasses. No nudity. Nude beach. No shirt, no shoes, no service. No thongs. Suit jacket required. Collar shirt required. No offensive t-shirts. No jeans.

      What kind of a sentence is this are you a chatbot?

    • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      So can we ban the Kippah? Is that cool? Or is banning that particular religious symbol offensive to you? Either people have a right to religious expression or they don’t. We don’t get to pick and choose favorites.

      And for that matter, I can tell you of at least one country that does not ban religious garb in schools: America. For all our faults, we still have a freedom of religion.

    • Tango@piefed.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      If dress codes are hunky dory then why is it necessary to ban this one?

      • Eximius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        They ignore other society dress codes citing “religious freedom” as a reason. Essentially becoming a shadow society, wrt this comment thread.

        In other words: no social contract for those that ignore the social contract

        • Daywim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          27 minutes ago

          Dress Codes in general are stupid in most cases. And this law is specifically discriminating against ONE religion, which is why I think it will be ruled unconstitutional by the constitutional court

        • Tango@piefed.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          But there was no society dress code banning this dress code until now. They were following the rules. So why did the rules need to be changed?

          • Eximius@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            Many society dress code rules are not codified. There is no law requiring people to not wear hats in professional settings, or inside places, but people naturally don’t, because it’s polite. Wearing a headscarf in a semi professional setting for a white christian in a semi-professional setting would maybe also be seen as impolite, as you’re obscuring who you are. Professional/casual dress code is also sometimes fairly fluid, so doesn’t help the conversation.

            However, in this case, again, they ignore all these society rules citing religious freedom. Hence, no social contract for those who ignore it. Codification of rules always follows egregious disrespect to social norms and/or misunderstandings.

            And, most likely, they are getting fed up with the shadow society that is getting built by immigrants. It is completely allowed to be fed up by that as a society (the country can do whatever rules it wants for its inhabitants, especially democratically agreed to by the general population). You are welcome to move around, but ignoring customs will not make you friends. Just as if a white christian went into a mosque in the middle east wearing shorts and no headscarf. Although probably jail time would follow there.

  • WormFood@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    24 hours ago

    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)?

    • Lumisal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      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.

    • blackberry28@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      22 hours ago

      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.

      • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        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.

        • Jankatarch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          I will add that other groups, like trans women from middle eastern backgrounds, do wear head covering to feel more feminine and in line with their real gender too.

          I myself still wear black covid mask 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.

          • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            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 ?

            • Jankatarch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 hours ago

              Muslim majority countries are targeted by Islamic terrorists overwhelmingly more than any.

              • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 hours ago

                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%.

      • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        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.

  • QuickSuccess@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    As a non Muslim who was born and lived in a Muslim majority country, I 100% agree with this ban. Children shouldn’t be forced or indoctrinated into that oppressive way of life. When they grow up, they can wear it if they want.

    There are millions, possibly hundreds of millions of women and girls around the world that are forced to wear that (or even more extreme versions of it) against their will. Just because we have some anecdotes of women wanting to wear it (after being brainwashed their whole lives with it) doesn’t mean that banning it would infringe on anyone’s rights.

    Believe me there are entire countries where if you as a woman went there you would be forced to cover up 😢.

    • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Then again should we be policing how women dress in an open and free society? Because, you know, that’s what Muslim countries do, so maybe if you don’t like Muslims then don’t emulate them?

      Or are you in favor of this sort of let’s call it Cultural Marxism, where the state dictates couture? Coutoural Marxism, as it were.

      • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        That s paradoxe of tolerance. Why should we tolerate a tradition that isn’t even considered a religious practice by the majority of Muslim that directly put women under man in every way concevable at the first glance. Have you ever thought why it s only women who had te put it ? It s because they are dirty and could be tentation for other men. Like litteraly the argument of saying what where you wearing at a women that report an agression or worse. Also litteraly what a terrorist who make the attack on “promenade des anglais” said in tribunal regarding the fact he killed other Muslim. Only time in the trial he show any emotion. We dont have to tolerate the intolerable

        • Avicenna@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          20 minutes ago

          Denying girls basic education is surely the best way to encourage them to be independent and think for themselves. Because that is what will happen, people won’t relocate, they will just try not to send their girls to school or try to find other ways around it.

          Why not instead make sure these people get courses on basic sociology, philosophy, international culture and humanities so that when they are of age they are in a better place to think for themselves and refuse this culture if they find it abusive?

      • QuickSuccess@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Ideally we shouldn’t, but practically we must, only to prevent religious oppression and abuse, and the spread of such things.

  • acargitz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    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.

    • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      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

  • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    19 hours ago

    “You can’t wear those clothes here!! This an open and free society! Here in Austria we follow The One True Dresscode.”

  • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    You know theres also the solution of just making sure theyre not forced to wear it. The problem is not a fucking piece of clothing but systematic oppression. The west happily does systematic oppression so long as it doesnt look bad. The only difference in other places is that it looks bad from the outside. You shouldnt change the looks of it but what actually happens. And on top of that, if you have a child in a school that is visibly distressed because theyre forced to wear something thats a sign of something not being right. If the government bans it youre removing a sign of abuse. Its like making having bruses illegal in public, youre not solving abuse just making everybodys life randomly a bit worse and hiding the signs of some abuse. Stupid ass law

    • racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      23 hours ago

      “You know theres also the solution of just making sure theyre not forced to wear it.” Just honest curiosity, but how? This sounds really difficult in any case, let alone with young children.

      • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I mean our whole social system is based on that. Teachers, doctors, coaches, etc already have the job of being the substitute parents or friends of children so this is just the extension of that existing job. The actual role of school, especially middle and high school, isnt really about shoving a shit ton of bullshit down the throats of kids but to expand their worldview, train their social skills, and yes, notice and report abuse when necessary. Forcing a child to wear a certian religious garment is abuse. But the child participating in it willingly shouldnt be illegal, i think thats ridiculous. I know there are a lot of reddit atheists here on lemmy but the same way any other choice is someones, religion should be too. Of course organized religion used to spread hate is different but as someone who lives in a city in sweden where religion is something that helps organize community rather than something that is used to spread hate, makes me think theres a world where everyone can believe in whataver they believe.

        • bigmamoth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          So u live in the country where political figure make Ads in Arabic language for their elections and u think u will have a say on can u remove ilsmaic veil from a child even if the child is strong enough to go against anything he was raise into and claim it was impose against his will ? U delusional.

    • cmhe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      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…

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I love opening these posts to see a wave of garbage europeans who would turn around and claim they have best free speech and nonsecularist nations in the world.

    For all of America’s insane faults, it is ironic that the first amendment is still something a majority of the EU has failed to match, and is often surpassed by plenty more third world countries and actual warzones.

    These same people were defending France’s pool swimwear law banning full cover swimwear and water proof headscarves.

    • joranm1@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Free speech means you are free to debate about decisions, and has nothing to do with the freedom to believe in whatever pleases you.

      And speaking of freedom of worship, there are many ways to implement it, from the US where you can do anything in the open - including blatant proselytism - to France where on the contrary, you don’t have the right to do anything religious in the public space - arguably not ideal either.

      So, because no law is perfect and you are free to express yourself on the subject, you are free to tell us garbage Europeans how you think it should be done 😉

  • growsomethinggood ()@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    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.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        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.

        • LittleBorat3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          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?

    • iturnedintoanewt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • JustEnoughDucks@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        21 hours ago

        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.

        • curled@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          50 minutes ago

          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)

      • Zacryon@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 day ago

        I have quickly checked and unfortunately Austria does allow homeschooling. So the concern of isolation is sadly not entirely unjustified.

    • Zacryon@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      Good points you raise there. Therefore further measures are required to prevent said isolating consequences.

    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Probably less than the number that decided enforcing an oppressive style of dress wasn’t worth the hassle when faced with minimal societal pressure.

      • Ioughttamow@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        But like, if it’s cold out and I wrap my scarf around my head, is that ok? Why not?

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          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.

        • teslekova@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          That’s fine under this law because it directly targets Muslim religious observance.