Danish People’s Party headscarf post by MP Allan Feldt has triggered criticism across Denmark after he photographed a woman wearing a headscarf at what appeared to be a children’s playground and suggested she was neglecting the children around her.
The post, published on X and later deleted, showed a woman holding a phone near several small children. According to DR, the woman’s identity and the location of the image are not known. DR also reported that it chose to censor the woman in a screenshot of the post.
In the message, Feldt, a Member of Parliament (folketingsmedlem) for the Danish People’s Party (Dansk Folkeparti, DF), wrote that the woman was “probably” a Muslim on subsidised employment and claimed she was looking after her phone rather than the children. He also speculated that she might be sending money to “her Muslim homeland”.
The post drew strong criticism from politicians in several parties, including conservative and liberal voices who said the message crossed a line between strict immigration politics and the public shaming of a private individual.
The headscarf post and the woman in the playground
The controversy began with Feldt’s decision to publish a photo of a woman who appeared to be working or present at a childcare setting. In Denmark, pedagogical staff (pædagogisk personale) often use phones or tablets as part of daily institutional work, including communication with parents, registering illness or managing activities.
That context became central to the criticism. Critics argued that Feldt had presented a private person as a political symbol without knowing who she was, what she was doing, or whether she had any connection to the assumptions made in the post.
The case also raised concerns about the presence of children in the image. Minister for Children and Education (børne- og undervisningsminister) Jacob Mark of the Socialist People’s Party (Socialistisk Folkeparti, SF) criticised the post on Facebook and urged politicians not to photograph educational staff or children at play without permission.
His message was direct: adults should not use playgrounds and childcare settings as material for political attacks.
Criticism from other Danish parties
Mette Abildgaard, group chair (gruppeformand) of the Conservative People’s Party (Det Konservative Folkeparti), said the post made her feel physically uneasy and called it “raving mad”. She argued that it appeared to shame a random, innocent educator who had been passed on the street or near an institution.
Abildgaard also framed the issue as a broader question of what politicians legitimise when they target workers who wear headscarves. She asked whether similar suspicion should be directed at laboratory staff in hospitals or care workers in elder care simply because they wear religious clothing while doing their jobs.
Her reaction was notable because she also stressed that she supports a strict and consistent immigration policy. For her, the problem was not the existence of a hard line on immigration, but the decision to single out a private person on the basis of presumed religion and ethnicity.
Thomas Rohden, political spokesperson (politisk ordfører) for the Social Liberal Party (Radikale Venstre), was even more explicit. He accused DF of having become a party that repeatedly judges people because of religion or ethnic background. Rohden said the apology was not enough and called on Feldt to apologise publicly on X, where the original post had appeared.
Feldt deletes the post and apologises
After the criticism, Feldt deleted the post and sent an apology to DR by text message. He declined an interview, saying he wanted to give his family peace and quiet.
Feldt wrote that the post “was not okay” and that its rhetoric had missed the mark. He added: “I am not that person.”
He said his intention had been to draw attention to changes in family life and to the idea that Danish parents spend less time than before with small children because both parents are under pressure from work. According to Feldt, he became sad when he saw a person who, in his view, did not seem to have her attention on the children.
In the apology, Feldt also wrote that the episode had disrupted his normal ethical and moral compass. He said both he and his family had received threats and insults after the post, including accusations of racism and fascism. For that reason, he said he wanted to leave the case behind and would not answer further questions.
A new MP under scrutiny
Allan Feldt entered the Danish Parliament in 2026 as an MP for the Danish People’s Party. He is also known in Denmark as an entrepreneur and founder of the bottled water brand Aqua d’Or. Before joining DF, he had originally been associated with Nye Borgerlige but withdrew before the election because he feared wasting votes.
The controversy now places Feldt inside a wider debate about the language used by anti-immigration parties in Denmark. DF has long built part of its political profile around strict immigration policy, Danish cultural identity and criticism of Islam. But the reaction to Feldt’s post shows that even politicians who support restrictive immigration rules may reject personal attacks on ordinary workers.
The case is also likely to feed a broader Nordic discussion about privacy, religion and political rhetoric in everyday public spaces. Denmark, like other Nordic countries, combines strong protections for free speech with high expectations of social trust. When elected officials use images of private individuals to make political points, that balance becomes more difficult to maintain.
For Feldt, the apology may limit the immediate fallout. But for critics, the central issue remains whether the post was an isolated mistake or part of a broader pattern in which people are treated as suspicious because of their appearance, religion or background.
