Your Voice: Messi leaves a bitter taste among Hong Kong football fans; animal testing is cruelty (short letters)

Lionel Messi’s Hong Kong visit has been the talk of town. Amid profound anticipation from the entire city, the football legend was absent from Inter Miami’s friendly match against the local team on February 4.

Cheers from almost 40,000 fans turned into chants of “refund” for their expensive tickets after he failed to play.

To add insult to injury, Messi played in Japan merely days after leaving Hong Kong. Ironically, in contrast to the packed stadium in Hong Kong, banks of empty seats could be seen in Tokyo.

The crux of the problem lies in poor communication. Government officials say they were repeatedly told that Messi would play. The organisers claim they were only told that Messi could not play towards the end of the match.

While it is indisputable that Messi was discourteous towards Hong Kong, this incident also highlights the Hong Kong government’s inadequacy in managing events and communicating with the organisers.

It was evident that too much focus was put into promotion while practicality was overlooked.

Messi says rumours that his no-show in Hong Kong game was political are false

Charlotte Lau Wing-ching, St Paul’s Convent School (Primary Section)

Can you name more than five ingredients in the shampoo that you use often? Most of us wouldn’t be able to, yet we use it several times a week, assuming that it will benefit us without any hazardous side effects.

As mankind develops technology to innovate, many new chemicals are used in our products. To ensure that these products are safe and effective for human use and consumption, many companies worldwide are still testing on animals. However, I want to talk about why we shouldn’t test on animals.

Human beings don’t have the right to test products on animals without their consent. This is a violation of animal rights because they cannot choose if they want to participate or not. We are forcing them to take risks on behalf of us.

Since we are very similar to animals, they should be treated with the same respect as people. Imagine if you were subjected to a deadly experiment without giving consent; how would you feel?

If we do not test on humans because it makes us uncomfortable, why should we test on animals if they will have the same experience as us?

It is crucial to safeguard the rights of animals

Coco Cheung, Valtorta College

Sharing your Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a popular trend across the world. More people are starting to identify themselves as one of the 16 personalities that are part of the test.

However, I believe that we should treat personality tests in a more rational way and put an end to over-labelling ourselves.

The MBTI is a psychological testing tool based on the theories of Carl Jung. It is designed to help people better understand their personality type and the career fields that would suit them.

Some schools and companies have also started to use the MBTI test while conducting interviews in order to select students or employees who have certain traits.

However, the MBTI fails to consider the dynamic process of people’s character development. Personality traits change over time and through experience, but the test’s classification system only accounts for 16 personalities based on temporary responses.

The purpose of understanding personalities should be to accept others, improve ourselves and create a harmonious society – not to put people in boxes.

Expert discusses why we love MBTI personality test and if it’s useful

Jimmy Guan Changyi, Tsuen Wan Public Ho Chuen Yiu Memorial College

To address the growing issue of plastic waste, Hong Kong has implemented a new law that imposes fees on designated plastic bags used for trash.

Although this initiative aims to reduce plastic bag usage and promote sustainability, concerns have arisen regarding the potential financial burden it may place on households. It is crucial for us to find a balance between the environmental impact of plastic waste and its effects on all strata of society.

The estimated monthly cost for a household using one large-sized bag per day is HK$33 to HK$51.

It is crucial for the government to implement measures that ensure the plastic bag tax does not disproportionately affect the general population.

Subsidies should be introduced to assist low-income households, enabling them to adapt to the new plastic bag fees without compromising their essential needs. Additionally, laws should be in place to promote the affordability of reusable bags as a viable alternative for all residents.

By implementing measures that address equity and affordability, individuals can make sustainable choices and contribute to a greener future for Hong Kong.