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?
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.
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 ?
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
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.
While religion itself is a disaster, this is unambiguously targetting one religion in particular and will not have positive effects.
They wanna increase that to 70%
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?
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.
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 is 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.
Have u any source regarding what u advance? Causrnin my research on how Muslim country fight extremism they dont employ only one type of solution. It s a pix of solution where u always find one wich is kinda everything they can. But mostly they enforce the study of their version of islam. Which they can cause they it s culturally implemented in their country from a long time.
So do u prefer the state enforce law on believer or on the religion itself ?
Also it s part of the Islamic brotherhood propaganda that in any circonstance Muslim are persecuted for any and all reason. And it s always give hand got the arm eaten. So no we dont have to be tolerant toward thoses.
Societal isolation of extremism is a good strategy and it will give result in the long run.
But yeah alone this decision won’t fix all issue. But I dont see how a liberal western society can rule what islam is practice. But yeah going to mosque, religious gathering and event having a 0 tolerance policy toward extremism is also necessary.
Tldr the veil ban alone isn’t enough. It isn’t a perfect policy like most are but its definetly better than doing nothing.
I like how you first downvote and then ask for references. Shouldn’t it go the other way, ask for references and downvote if not provided? I really don’t think you are here for the discussion aspect but anyway in case someone wonders to this corner of the topic here is a useful summary:
For effect of headscarf/religious symbols ban on various aspects of life from work to education, you can look at couple of prototypical examples: Turkey (education, public service), France,Belgium,Netherlands (education), Canada (public service). I don’t know all of them to the same depth but know that they have been the topic of numerous studies related to this. Some that I can refer to:
A general article but focusing on the law in France:
We find that the law reduces the secondary educational attainment of Muslim girls and affects their trajectory in the labor market and family composition in the long run. We provide evidence that the ban operates through increased perceptions of discrimination and that it strengthens both national and religious identities.
Per the findings in the report, Muslim women are experiencing heightened levels of stress and discriminatory treatment from colleagues due to the legislation, in ways that leave many facing a difficult decision between their religious beliefs and their professional careers.
Germany This is not religion based, it is language based (right wing government also love language banning as an assimilation technique, so it relates to the topic)
Do forced assimilation policies always succeed in integrating immigrant groups? This article examines how a specific assimilation policy—language restrictions in elementary school—affects integration and identification with the host country later in life. After World War I, several U.S. states barred the German language from their schools. Affected individuals were less likely to volunteer in World War II and more likely to marry within their ethnic group and to choose decidedly German names for their offspring. Rather than facilitating the assimilation of immigrant children, the policy instigated a backlash, heightening the sense of cultural identity among the minority.
Turkey This is a page from hrw presenting multiple links. It is too long to give a summary, but the headline is discriminatory effects of head scarf ban on societal level. And in Turkey, headscarf ban has never erased that identity. It in fact strengthened it and was likely a contributing factor in AKP’s (the current religious oppressive goverment of Turkey) rise to power (this is my interpretation, not written here).
Societal isolation of extremism is a good strategy and it will give result in the long run.
These bans are coming from a place of extremism. So even if one were to assume they were banning extremism in all cases (and they are not always banning extremism in all cases), you are trading individual level extremism with state sponsored extremism. Ofcourse if you have right wing tendencies you won’t view this as extremism the same way someone who wants their four year old daughter to view a headscarf won’t view that as extremism. However state sponsored extremism is often much more dangerous. But it is funny that for all this talk about assimilation, right wing even really fails at this because all their techniques of assimilation end up strengthening the identities they want to suppress. Guess why? Because they don’t actually want these people to be invisible. They want them to be more visible then before, but they want this in a way which creates societal tension so that they can leverage this tension. It is the right wing government supporters who think these policies propagate their national identity and world-view to their country where as it is quite literally doing the opposite. Even more funny is that in countries where religious parties and right wing parties co-exist, both of the groups actually benefit from this polarization. I can only laugh at how nicely they are being deceived in this regard. And in effect a state which bans religious symbols from schools is the same as one that forces it.
Tldr the veil ban alone isn’t enough
You got this wrong, veil ban isn’t just not enough. It does not achieve any of the intended effects, It is just a tool to the right-wing politics for driving a wedge between communities. A state deciding what people should do with their religious identities is there only for one reason, create political tension in a country and then use that tension as potential to strengthen their grip.
Have u any source regarding what u advance?
Ok your turn, do you have references for any of the things you advance?
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.
I thought girls weren’t required by Islam to wear headscarfs until that age anyway?
Some will say they aren’t requires at all other will put it around the age of 3.
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.
Yes
“You can’t wear those clothes here!! This an open and free society! Here in Austria we follow The One True Dresscode.”
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.
How is this even a debate? Everyone should agree that they should be banned. But for some reason, when it is religiously motivated, it suddenly is fine to force woman to veil themselves? Imagine the utter outrage of the Left when the Right would force women to wear hijabs. Why tf is it okay when one side does it, but not okay when the other does it? It’s pure hypocrisy.
Honestly, we should bring back headscarves (and hats, while we’re here) as a fashionable accessory.
That’d nip this in the bud.
And the fun shenaniganery that goes with hats! Only straw hats in summer, but so help you god if you’re seen wearing a straw hat after labor day.
The absolute slander against traditional hats and scarves has got to stop!
It’s not getting cooler and we wore them for a reason.
I’m still pretty flummoxed about what to do with them indoors though. But I can see a hat holster taking off, like those people that wear big ass phones on their belts. Or, the way things are going, just hang hats on your gun holster lol
I actually agree. That might make the girls feel more comfortable with not wearing it if they want. Seeing that you’re the only ones doing something sometimes just ingrains the need to set yourself apart. (Ask me how I know.)
Of course, we’d have to deal with idiots whining about cultural appropriation again.
deleted by creator
