Austria's new headscarf ban for under-14s sparks debate

I have quickly checked and unfortunately Austria does allow homeschooling. So the concern of isolation is sadly not entirely unjustified.

And guess what? This literally just happened last week in Flanders in Belgium.

Girls were rounded up and publically stripped in front of administrators.

Now they can't go to school but it is illegal to stay home, but the schools are also completely full so they aren't allowed to enroll I'm another school that doesn't publically strip them.

It's fucked. But of course, all other religions can wear whatever they want as long as they are not brown people.

These laws encourage communities to establish their own private schools, so that their kids are no longer targeted by this kind of fascist intrusion by the state.

But like, if it’s cold out and I wrap my scarf around my head, is that ok? Why not?

I'd be for it, religious indoctrination and gas lighting kids is nothing but abuse. i'd raise the age to 18 though.

You support the religious indoctrination of children?

When removing the bigotry makes it a bad law, it's a bad law.

If you disagree, you should say why you disagree, so that your comment is constructive to the discussion.

The same ones that are currently being targetted...?

Then they will wear them at home. And they will never leave the home, because the law prohibits them from leaving home in the garb required of their religion.

You and I can call this clothing oppressive, but in prohibiting her from wearing it, we are also her oppressers.

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.

The most oppressive hat. Take a pill.

They should just ban all kinds of hats inside. Even a baseball hat is disrespectful

Loosen control over women by controlling what women are allowed to wear because the clothing she wants to wear comes from a culture that controls what women are allowed to wear. Great job liberating women from having to make their own choices, you're such a hero.

I wish the government will ban you from wearing a hat, I don't like it when men wearing hats.

I think that's the point he's trying to make

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?

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.

You’re joking, but an equivalent ban would be on wearing crosses, or removing distinct Christian architectural features like church and cathedral towers/bells.

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.

Where do I get the right to tell you anything about how much clothing you must remove from your children?

That's what you're doing. You're giving me that power. You're telling me that my decision on what your children must wear supersedes both your judgment, and theirs. They don't get to wear what they want, because I have decided that they need to show me some skin.

You think I should have that power because your beliefs are superstitious nonsense and you can't be trusted to exercise those beliefs?

Seems perfectly fine to me.

^ This is fascism. This is what fascism looks like. It slips in quietly, and polishes away those minor nonconformities that have been so offending our delicate sensibilities It establishes and promotes the idea that we're all better off with just a touch more authoritarianism. One more edict, one more imposition of state against an individual we don't really like. That's "perfectly fine".

Fuck that. Democracy says power flows from the people. The state serves the people, collectively and individually. And the state has no legitimate interest in dictating what may and may not be worn by children.

This law is bigoted nonsense.

I don't like tgis supersticious habit, so i support the racist superstitious habit.

Forcing kids to wear specific item of clothing, or forcing kids to not wear specific item of clothing is the same superstitious habit, just with a different superstition behind it.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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)

I was referring to whom ELSE does it hurt.

Regarding the other, you may be completely right but that is one culture trying to legislate another. It sounds like your opinion is that banning certain head wear, is helping them. It's for their own benefit. Is it? Or is it just so that Austrians don't have to feel uncomfortable around foreigners?

Feddit.org

Yep

This law also oppresses freedom of expression and it will only make muslims more resentful and resistant to integration.

What if a woman chooses to wear a hijab?

Are you not then hindering their freedom of expression?

Should turbans and yamakas be banned too?

Should circumcision, a permanent elective surgery, also be banned because it infringes on (often an infant's) bodily autonomy?

You speak as if these is an irrefutable moral basis to this when the reality is it's based almost entirely on cultural biases.

Freedom of expression means that you don't get to choose for others, especially when it comes to their bodily autonomy.

Ironically, this is patriarchal, authoritarian and ultimately antithetical to Western values.

That s litteraly why they are forced to wear a veil in Islam. Are u dumb?

I don't think it makes them less valuable rather overprotected. I think it comes down to jealousy being more pronounced.

You are being insincere. You are describing it as if its just another piece of garment. And that evil european racists want to ban it. No one has problem with any other traditional piece of clothing. Hindus, arabs, africans they can wear whatever because their are just clothes. Hijab is different because it changes how you view/interact the person wearing it. Its like wearing lingerie in public: not appropriate. Grown women can do whatever but for children there are different expectations. And its a widely accepted norm that govs do have an interest in how kids are brought up. Its not to sole discretion of the parents.

Is your nephew allowed to wear one outside the house?

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

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

I feel like a lot of said leaders would be perfectly fine with a positive answer

Context for the historically illiterate