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.

  • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    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”.

    • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      The idea that banning head scarves is incrementalism towards banning genital mutilation strains credulity. Besides, we all know that Austria of all places would never ban circumcision. This is not about the human rights of children.

      • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 days ago

        The idea that banning head scarves is incrementalism towards banning genital mutilation strains credulity

        I didn’t suggest that, you did. You said both things could protect children’s rights. I just pointed out that the fact that some law doesn’t address entirety of a problem doesn’t prove anything about motivations behind it. Many different things influence the scope of laws. Not just the intent of the legislators but also things like popular support, how much would the enforcement cost, is the enforcement possible in practical terms or some undesired consequences of such enforcement.

        • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 days ago

          I question the logic if banning head scarves is higher priority than forced genital mutilation

          • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            19 days ago

            In this case priority is a matter of perspective, not logic. Banning circumcision may be more important for you and me but it doesn’t mean it’s the priority for Austrian voters and legislators.

            • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              19 days ago

              Precisely, and it speaks to the credibility of the human rights basis, leaving simple bigotry as the most probable motive.