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.
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.
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.
It is so much better to be forced what to wear or not wear by the fucking government. Do you hear yourself?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 ?
Totally support this. This will prevent Muslim parents from forcing their children to wear hijab.
Should just outright ban them to be honest.
They wanna increase that to 70%
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)?
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.
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.
The most oppressive hat. Take a pill.
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, 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.
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!
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
Watch the average Liberal agree with far right parties because they are racist again.
Head scarves laws/rules are not “racist”, please try again.
100% of users called Mulligrubs are racist. That is not a personal attack.
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.
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.
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’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.
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?
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.
If dress codes are hunky dory then why is it necessary to ban this one?
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
You sound like an asshole, you know that right?
Maybe you want to expand on how analysing the situation rephrasing from my perspective is being an “asshole”. Because you sure like to name-call instead of attacking an allegedly stupid idea.
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
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?
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.
You keep talking about how headscarves are disrespectful, but frankly I don’t see how. Disrespectful to Austrian culture?
Generally this is a whataboutism argument.
For one: no Austrian elderly dress like that, most likely for 50< years. Times have changed. And no, most likely that is not appropriate attire in a professional or semi-professional setting.
Secondly, it’s not like the reason headscarves are being used here is to be respectful of Austrian customs and culture. Mostly exact opposite: ignoring common local customs, and being themselves.
Codification of rules always follows egregious disrespect to social norms and/or misunderstandings.
Yeah, all rules are 100% put in place with good intentions. Like the rules that prevented people from harboring runaway slaves. Such egregious disrespect! Or was that an “oopsy, just a misunderstanding” rule?
Sorry, not trying to come off aggressive, but it’s a naïve take to assume all rules are put in place with good faith. It’s also naïve to assume that “social norms” are all appropriate, and should never be challenged. History shows that isn’t the case, and it’s worth it to look around at our own societies and rules with a skeptical lens.
Okay, you’re right. I was indeed writing under the assumption of good faith.
Challenging social norms is fine. What’s not fine is applying a minority social norm on the majority, and trying to be protected by the government (that should represent the people), while antagonizing the same majority you want to accept you.
“You can’t wear those clothes here!! This an open and free society! Here in Austria we follow The One True Dresscode.”
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 😢.
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.
why would we call that cultural marxism?
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
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? Oh right, forgot. It is because people who pass such laws generally come from far-right and they are not too keen on independent thinking either. For them marginalization works better.
Who deny girl basic education ? The gouvernement that want every pre 14 child to be on the same lvl or islamist capture parent that want to force their belief on their children ? Nice inversion
Your whole next paragraphe is just a profound naive view of humanity. Why can t we just be all friend ? Kinda same level. But to be short, cause it doesn’t work. If it work that issue would have never arrived in the first place right ? Also they can refuse the culture if they find it abusive… U have no idea how family is far stronger powerful societal cercle on individual than any other. The opportunity to refuse isn’t something than most can obtain.
The goverment that knows that if you pass a law like this, there will be parents who will first try to cut their kids from education rather than to try comply with it. Worse the kids will grow up to think that the state is their enemy not their ally. It has been like this in every country that had tried this approach. You have no idea how dynamics work with in these families. Like most children, when small, they look up to their parents and they want to emulate their style, culture behaviour. It may be their dad/mother that are telling them to cover their head, but at that age they don’t resent this. So they don’t view a state banning them this right as the saviour, they see it as opression and they shy away from education. That is why the correct approach to this through education not laws.
For the second part, there have been countries that tried this route in the past. It cost them decades of internal conflict that is still going on today. It is naive to think that banning something will magically fix problems associated to it. No, it will make it worse, it will marginalize and isolate those kids from the society. They will grow up resenting the state and cling even harder to their cultural norms.
Ideally we shouldn’t, but practically we must, only to prevent religious oppression and abuse, and the spread of such things.
Oh calm down. You’re preventing the wearing of hats.
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
“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.
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.
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.
Your entire block of text there just mostly skips everything. Children are very easily manipulated, and if you’d ask a teacher to figure out if a child is doing something voluntarily, or is being put up to it by an adult… I’m sure they’ll tell you that that is really hard to figure out. And it also raises the question of how voluntary something can be if you hear older family members talking about people without a hijab being terrible people because of that. I’m sure the child will then “voluntarily” wear one…
That’s of course the big issue with religuous upbringing, if you look at it from the outside, it all seems very predatory and problematic…
They are also told that girls and women who “choose” not to wear hijab can go to hell, which they strongly believe in. There are also some cases in many countries of girls being abused or even killed for taking off the hijab despite it theoretically being a choice. So you’re spot on, a child can be easily convinced to voluntarily participate in their own oppression, you just need to paint the alternative in a bad enough light.
