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 get why women who are sexually mature have to cover in islam. But I don’t get covering of little girls. I more often see covered mums with their little daughters uncovered which makes sense. But I don’t get covering of the little ones.
If you get it please explain.
Because I only see that as a way to keep women less valuable than men.
If not for religion, banning a scarf would be universally seen as inane.
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…
Because wearing these hurts… checks notes… Oh right, no one.
Nope.
If hijabs are worn for the purpose of “hiding women/girls so they do not get raped” this does several things that hurt:First of all, it oppresses women in their freedom of expression. They learn that it is bad to show themselves and accept their bodies as they are: a natural and normal thing. Furthermore it makes women responsible for the actions of sexual offenders.
Following from the latter, it eases the responsibility on the education of young men, who should absolutely have to learn how to deal with their urges in a healthy manner and that it absolutely not acceptable to rape or molest women.
This also leads to a subordination of women below men. Which, as we should know nowadays, is backwards and detrimental
Then, this can also worsen the independence and confidence of women and lead to several mental health problems due to suppression of their natural physiological development. This does not need to be just the demonization of sexuality itself, but also loads their self image and body with shame, which is absolutely backwards, since… well human bodies are a natural and normal thing and it is totally okay to have one… obviously.
It is already bad enough how we, as a society, judge people by their appearance. No need to worsen this by also feeding into severe complexes by letting girls getting forced into having to hide themselves.
So yes: this does hurt on several levels.
First of all, it oppresses women in their freedom of expression.
Do you think it’s possible that some women actually choose to wear the Hijab? I’m Muslim and most women in my family don’t wear Hijab, but the ones that do really strongly believe in it. There’s zero men in my family that have asked any of their daughters or wives to wear Hijab.
This also leads to a subordination of women below men.
Tell me you’ve never hung out with Hijabis in the West without telling me you’ve never hung out with Hijabis.
It seems like you’re a Western Chauvinist who hasn’t really done any of the work to understand the nuances of the Hijab from a woman’s perspective. Not all women are forced into wearing the Hijab. By forcing young women to not wear it, you’re limiting their self expression. I don’t understand why the government should be involved in this decision which is very personal.
Do you think it’s possible that some women actually choose to wear the Hijab?
Exactly. People should not be forced to wear religious clothing but people should not be forced to not wear religious clothing either.
My brother had to call CPS just this Friday on his neighbor because he thought it’s okay to beat her 17yo daughter in the street for forgetting to wear a hijab. The neighbor was even born in US, him/his wife has hung out with us in the past. She used to speak a very similar tune about hijab like it’s my choice and I believe in it and it gives me strength and all the indoctrinated crap that few years ago, I too thought was women empowerment of some kind.
Where was she protecting her daughter? Nowhere, instead she left a bag of shit at my brother’s front door last night in front of the doorbell camera.
While I also have independent women that have chosen to wear hijab in theirs 30s in my life, I’m leaning towards this whole concept is fucked. I don’t see where you draw the line between, it’s my choice that’s why I do it vs I might get murdered by my brother if I don’t do it. How many women live in this fear. I also worked in immigration law clinic in UK for a few months. I have also met a woman, who was refugee and that had no male relatives with her, be scared of removing hijab on the fear of retaliation from community she will desperately need support from before she can be legal.
As a man, I’ve seen other men going around without shirts this summer. I wouldn’t appreciate a law that insisted I had to go around without my shirt too.
Different people have different ideas of what modesty means. It isn’t, or at least shouldn’t be, the law’s job to force us all to be the same.
Iran has imprisoned women for NOT wearing headscarves. This is the same thing, just enforcing different cultural norms. Neither is very free.
This law also oppresses freedom of expression and it will only make muslims more resentful and resistant to integration.
If the law is created to protect individual human rights, children’s rights, to protect them even from the religious beliefs of their parents, then they should make circumcision illegal as well.
If they don’t, then this isn’t their motivation at all, and they are simply bigots.
(They won’t)
Yeah… that’s not how any laws work. Lawmakers make compromises all the time and introduce some rules gradually. They made non-smoking rooms mandatory first, then they banned smoking in public workplaces and businesses open to the public, then they banned smoking near to bus stops and so on and so on. You don’t go “if the law was created to protect non-smokers they would ban smoking everywhere where non-smokers are. If they don’t, then this isn’t their motivation at all”.
From 2027-28, they will also tattoo a crescent on the foreheads of students from offending communities. For easier identification, of course.
The following year, they will go to separate schools to learn more about European culture.
After that, they will go to a special work camp to learn useful skills. This solution will be quite final, so no more steps will be required.
The world would be a better place if leaders were capable of even asking the question, “Are we the baddies?” The second step is answering the question truthfully.
Legally dictating how much of a minor’s body must be exposed to the general public? Are you fucking serious?
What right-wing fascists are promoting this law?
Legally dictating that children are slightly less forced into superstitious habits?
Seems perfectly fine to me.
Sexist and racist nonsense targeted to control women and punish minorities.
Exactly. Good thing then that this ban was enacted, since this may help a little to not punish children and loosen control over women.
But genital mutilation is still ok, I hope?
please ban IGM and MGM as well as FGM, yeah
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.
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.
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.
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
I love Austria so much, been there a few times. This does not represent the folks I broke bread with over there.
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.
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.
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.
Actually the law you described would suck ass as well.
When removing the bigotry makes it a bad law, it’s a bad law.
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.
You support the religious indoctrination of children?
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.
