SINGAPORE: Many Singaporeans online have reacted to an opinion piece on the recent announcement from the Ministry of Education allowing for caning in schools in egregious cases, but only for older males.

Gen X mother Ruth Chew wrote a piece titled “Only boys are caned in schools – but what does that teach our daughters?” published in CNA on Wednesday (May 13).

Ms Chew, a mother of two daughters, wrote that the announcement concerning caning had struck a nerve, and said she had been caned growing up. She raised several points concerning accountability and the goal of disciplining children, and said that her daughter, 17, had wondered why only boys would be caned, since girls have also been bullies.

Like Workers’ Party MP Jamus Lim, she also cited research that said physical punishment is ineffective in changing behaviour, and can have negative long-term effects, though acknowledged that MOE’s measures are meant to send the signal that bullying is unacceptable. However, she expressed uncertainty about caning, as it does not seem to make children understand why their actions were wrong.

Commenting on Ms Chew’s piece, a number of Singaporeans seem to not only still believe in caning, but also said that girls should be caned too, though privately and not on the buttocks, but on their hands.

“During my secondary school days, boys and girls could get caning; the only difference was that boys were caned in public during assembly, while girls were caned in the principal’s office by a female teacher. Both genders have offences announced in assembly because it is to show the whole school what one can expect if he/she did something wrong. School discipline has become so soft over the last 2 decades,” one wrote.

“During my time, girls were caned too. Just not in public. In the Principal’s office. So I don’t see why girls are not allowed to be caned now,” added another.

“I’m a woman, and I have gone through being bullied in school many years ago. And when girls are bullies, they are more vicious than boys, trust me. During my time, it was only about making fun of or calling names, but these days are far worse. In many cases, I see physical abuse done by girls. Some are just so horrendous. So if we just focus on boys, what about girls? Canning should be done for both genders if found guilty,” wrote a Facebook user.

“You’d be surprised, girls who bully other girls are more violent than boys bullying boys,” a commenter agreed.

“Boy-girl disparity aside, the writer is looking through the lens of having well-behaved kids that don’t need the cane. But I’ve seen the worst of them, and some kids do need caning as that is the only language they understand,” one opined. /TISG

Read also: WP MP Jamus Lim says caning bullies may be counterproductive, but Singaporeans push back

This article (‘Girls can be more vicious too’: Singaporeans weigh in on school caning debate) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.

SINGAPORE: Concerns over fairness in school discipline policies have surfaced online after Education Minister Desmond Lee revealed in Parliament that public caning for bullying offences in schools applies only to boys, not girls.

Speaking in Parliament this week, Mr Lee said caning is reserved for “egregious” cases where “all other measures are inadequate” and is carried out under strict protocols.

He reiterated that bullying and hurtful behaviour have “no place” in schools but stressed that the Ministry of Education’s (MOE) disciplinary approach is intended primarily to educate rather than punish.

According to Mr Lee, schools adopt a tiered system when dealing with student misconduct, with harsher penalties such as suspension or caning imposed only for “egregious or repeated serious offences.” Disciplinary measures are accompanied by counselling and restorative practices aimed at repairing relationships and supporting victims through safety plans where necessary.

Addressing questions on corporal punishment, Mr Lee acknowledged research showing that “poorly administered and frequent” corporal punishment can lead to negative outcomes, particularly in unregulated environments such as the home.

However, he argued that the context in Singapore schools is different. Any caning must receive approval from the school principal and may only be carried out by authorised teachers. He added that it is never used as a standalone punishment, but forms part of a broader disciplinary and restorative process.

Mr Lee also said schools consider factors such as a student’s maturity and whether caning is likely to help the student reflect and learn from their behaviour before deciding on the punishment. Students’ well-being is monitored afterwards, with counselling provided to support reflection and rehabilitation.

He said MOE’s position is informed by research suggesting that “clear boundaries enforced by firm, meaningful consequences” can help young people make better choices and reduce bullying.

Mr Lee noted that caning in schools applies only to boys, in line with Singapore’s Criminal Procedure Code, which prohibits women from being punished with caning.

He stressed, however, that this does not mean girls who bully others are treated less seriously. Girls found guilty of bullying or hurtful behaviour may still face disciplinary measures, including detention, suspension, grade adjustments, and other school-based punishments, depending on the severity of the offence.

The minister added that MOE “regularly reviews” its discipline guidelines to ensure they remain appropriate and said the ministry will continue refining its approach based on feedback and research.

He also announced that all schools are expected to implement anti-bullying policies by the end of the year, following MOE guidelines aimed at ensuring consistency in case management across schools.

Despite those assurances, the revelation that caning applies only to boys has triggered criticism online, with some Singaporeans questioning why different punishments are being imposed based on gender. Some commenters went as far as describing the policy as “sexist” and calling for equal treatment in school disciplinary measures.

Among the comments circulating online was one parent who wrote: “As parents, I cane both my boy and girl. It works well.”

Another commenter argued that bullying is not confined to boys and that corporal punishment should apply across the board: “Cane if needed, whether it’s boys or girls. Cos bullying is everywhere in schools. Be it boy or’ or girls’ school. They should be taught, and cane works for all. The parents should sokong the cane and not pamper the kids.”

Some netizens suggested that female bullying can be equally, if not more, harmful than male bullying. One commenter remarked: “Minister need to watch more K-dramas to know gals bullying can be a lot worse.”

Others questioned what consequences girls would face in serious bullying cases. “So if girls are the bullies, what happens?” one commenter asked.

Several netizens framed the issue as one of gender equality, arguing that if corporal punishment remains part of the school disciplinary system, it should not be restricted to male students.

“If boys can be caned, then the girls also can be caned. Simple as that,” one comment read.

Another person said: “I don’t think the reason quoted to not cane girls is appropriate unless we are talking about exercising the same level of caning on kids vs prisoners.”

Some older Singaporeans also pointed to past school experiences, claiming that corporal punishment was once administered to both sexes.

“Those born in 80s era will experience teachers will cane both boys and girls. I agree with most comment there must gender equality. If boys can be cane, girls must also be cane,” one commenter wrote.

Others argued that girls can sometimes engage in more psychologically damaging forms of bullying.

One commenter asserted, “Some girls are more vicious than boys. Caning should not be a punishment reserve for the boys only.”

This article (Why are only boys caned in schools? Netizens raise concerns over MOE policy) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.