The Lens: Cyberbullying is a serious problem affecting youth mental health

Megan Chan, 16, Island School

Towards the end of 2023, an Indian boy named Priyanshu Yadav took his own life after enduring ruthless cyberbullying upon posting an Instagram photo of him dressed in a sari. The queer teen received hateful comments and threats for his traditionally feminine clothing and make-up.

It hurts me to hear that someone took their life because of cyberbullying. Online hate is a harmful practice which should be considered absolutely unacceptable to everyone.

Although the Indian government is taking steps to address the issue, it is disappointing that people are ignoring their advice and don’t seem to care about hurting others’ well-being.

However, this issue is not specific only to India. Countries like Brazil, the United States and South Africa have also seen a significant spike in cyberbullying. Seeing this, isn’t it obvious that we need to take the issue more seriously?

One of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals looks to protect children from abuse, and this initiative includes cyberbullying. The UN has even talked about how stress caused by cyberbullying can be detrimental towards one’s mental and physical health.

It is essential for schools to include curricula that address these issues and work towards reducing – and hopefully eliminating – cyberbullying. Students need to learn about the impact cyberbullying can have, and there should be clear consequences in place for bullies.

Regarding queer youth, it is important that we set laws to ensure their safety and well-being. This is a substantial issue that cannot be overlooked. Cyberbullying must be stopped as soon as possible.

Read last week’s news snippet here

South Korea will no longer allow its citizens to sell or eat dog meat starting in 2027.

The National Assembly endorsed the landmark legislation by a 208-0 vote on Tuesday. It will become law after it is endorsed by the State Council and signed by President Yoon Suk-yeol.

The bill would make the slaughtering, breeding, trade and sales of dog meat illegal. Breaking the law will be punishable by up to three years in prison or 30 million won (US$22,900) in fines.

Proposed by the ruling party, the bill gained the nod from parliament’s bipartisan agriculture committee for a vote in the 300-member, single-chamber assembly.

Efforts to ban dog meat consumption have faced fierce resistance from farmers and others in the country’s dog meat industry. Recent surveys show a majority of South Koreans do not eat dog meat any longer.

Activists say most dogs are electrocuted or hanged when slaughtered for meat, though breeders and traders argue there has been progress in making the slaughtering more humane.

“We reached a tipping point where most Korean citizens reject eating dogs and want to see this suffering consigned to the history books, and today our policymakers have acted decisively to make that a reality,” Chae Jung-ah, executive director of Humane Society International Korea, said in a statement.

In a survey released on Monday by Animal Welfare Awareness, Research and Education, a Seoul-based think tank, more than 94 per cent of respondents said they had not eaten dog meat for the past year and about 93 per cent said they would not do so in the future.

The agriculture ministry has estimated that as of April 2022, some 1,100 farms were breeding 570,000 dogs to be served at around 1,600 restaurants.

The Korean Association of Edible Dogs, a coalition of breeders and sellers, said the ban will affect 3,500 farms raising 1.5 million dogs as well as 3,000 restaurants.

Agencies and staff writers

• Do you agree with South Korea’s decision to ban dog meat?

• Why is it acceptable to ban the consumption of dog meat, when global societies regularly consume other animals such as pork, beef, chicken and fish?

• How will the decision to ban the consumption of dog meat affect the farmers and dog meat industry workers?