this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2026
230 points (97.5% liked)

World News

58063 readers
1590 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] wanderer@scribe.disroot.org 1 points 5 minutes ago

Totally support this. This will prevent Muslim parents from forcing their children to wear hijab.

[–] itsjustachairmary@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

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.

[–] Cornpop@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

Should just outright ban them to be honest.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago

Yes the traditional headdress of Christians should be banned as well.

[–] bigmamoth@lemmy.world -5 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

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 5 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

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.

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours 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 -5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (3 children)

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 5 points 2 hours 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?

[–] ZombieMantis@lemmy.world 3 points 3 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.ca 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

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 3 points 2 hours 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.ca 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

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 -1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Eximius@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

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.

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 5 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Education and incomeAccording to the MIPEX Index, access barriers to the labor market for immigrants are relatively low but unemployment is significantly more common among Muslims than among the average population at large. Approximately 40% Muslims born in Austria leave school before age 17.

They wanna increase that to 70%

[–] Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca 4 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

I thought girls weren't required by Islam to wear headscarfs until that age anyway?

[–] bigmamoth@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

Some will say they aren't requires at all other will put it around the age of 3.

[–] WormFood@lemmy.world 45 points 1 day ago (8 children)

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 2 points 4 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.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›