<p>
[The</a> Economics of Tiger Parenting - NYTimes.com](<a href=“Freakonomics - The hidden side of everything”>The Economics of Tiger Parenting - Freakonomics)</p>
<p>I can’t stop thinking about this story. I say I am sick of hearing about it and then I find myself googling Amy Chua’s name to see if there is anything new. I thought this op-ed piece was interesting</p>
<p>[Courtland</a> Milloy - A husband in the eye of Amy Chua, the Tiger Mother](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/23/AR2011012303712.html]Courtland”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/23/AR2011012303712.html)</p>
<p>I don’t agree with everything the author said but what interested me is how mad he is at the way Amy Chua has treated her husband. I must say, I share his outrage. Amy Chua has embarrassed her husband in front of the nation. He is either an ineffective parent watching helplessly from the sidelines or he agrees with her parenting and passively let her carry it out. He won’t discuss it and so we don’t really know what his role is. At any rate if I did this to my husband he would leave me. We’ve been married for 22 years but this transgression would be unforgivable.</p>
<p>If I am right and Amy Chua’s daughters are going to one day hold her accountable for her parenting then I hope he realizes they will hold him accountable too. He won’t get a free pass just because in private he tried to talk some sense into her. I predict that won’t be seen as enough.</p>
<p>My understanding is that Rubenfeld, Chua’s husband, asked her to remove all of the sections mentioning him from the book. Which she did, as one would expect a partner to do. He may have better anticipated the backlash the book would create.</p>
<p>I’ve been reading the articles about Amy Chua frequently these past days, and sometimes cannot believe some of the comments made, not against the style of parenting, but on China. Amy Chua said herself that this parenting style exists with other groups - ‘Chinese’ is just an umbrella term.<br>
Statistically, some of the comment may be true, but it’s still so ignorant and misinformed. These people, I think are completely missing the point. Sure, maybe they mean that tiger mothering doesn’t lead to success, but please stop attacking China personally. Some Chinese people accomplish great things.
It irks me. Anyway, you don’t have to agree. Just my two cents on the whole thing.</p>
<hr>
<pre><code> From various comments on newspaper articles:
“Off the top of your head can you name a SINGLE CONTEMPORARY CHINESE NOVELIST who RESIDES IN MAINLAND CHINA? Painter who lives in mainland China? Musical composer? Architect? Artisan? Inventor? Fashion designer? Playwright? Film director? Philosopher? Poet? Journalist? Religious leader? Actress/Actor? Entertainer? Comedian? Magician? Dancer? Pop Star? Ahtlete? Sports team? Television program or film made in China? Chinese museum devoted to modern art? School for the arts? Performing arts center? Theater? Symphony?
Can you name a SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSMAN OR WOMAN who RESIDES IN MAINLAND CHINA (Hong Kong doesnt count)? Chinese entrepreneur? Inventor? Engineer? Red hot technology start-up company? Chinese Brand Name? Chinese product or company recognized the world over? Chinese newspaper, magazine or news organization? Chinese research scientist? Medical research hospital? Scholarly medical journal? Medical research study? Breakthrough scientific advance in medicine? New medication or medical device that China has developed? Can you name a Chinese philanthropist, charitable foundation or charity?”
</code></pre>
<p>“Chinese just steal from Western companies anyway. They can’t do anything on their own.”
“Chinese are Communist and can’t to anything.”</p>
<p>Reading the WSJ article, I could not help thinking of May Zhou… I wander if she was raised in a similar way…</p>
<p>[Chinese</a> graduate student at Stanford found dead in trunk of car - Yellowworld Forums](<a href=“Welcome forums.yellowworld.org - BlueHost.com”>Welcome forums.yellowworld.org - BlueHost.com)
[Stanford</a> student committed suicide with pills, investigators say - SFGate](<a href=“http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-08-24/bay-area/17256299_1_zhou-s-family-investigators-bottles]Stanford”>http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-08-24/bay-area/17256299_1_zhou-s-family-investigators-bottles)</p>
<p>I am a Chinese mom, I don’t want to buy her book to endorse her but want to check it out from the library to really see her point. I heard her oral interviews at NPR and other places, it sounds like the media just try to bring out the “tiger” side of her but ignore her ultimate point that she realized she needed to change. However, I do agree with her that 1)parents should hold high expectation for their kids, <<but they=“” need=“” to=“” be=“” reasonable=“”>> 2) American parents, nowadays, are too permissive. </but></p>
<p>For me, being a Chinese mom, I feel offended on how she portrays and tries to “represent” billions of Chinese parents. She sets a very very wrong message to the world that chinese families in general are a monsterous group of abusive beast.</p>
<p>
</but></p>
<p>I don’t agree with this and had fought with DW on this through out DD’s K-12 school years. </p>
<p>The first and foremost understand your child. You can’t just hold high expectations without understanding your children. Also first build the base before expecting anything.</p>
<p>Attitude that one should look up is not correct, you can only fall if you never look down.
The correct attitude is to be absolute not relative. I hate the concept of being on top as described by Amy Chau’s, because you can never be the top. There will always be someone who will better than you in everything you do.</p>
<p>So the whole attitude of keeping high expectations is wrong. Let children be the persons they want to be not what you wanted to be. </p>
<p>Having absolute goals and not relative should be the way. You don’t want to be the best but you want to do your best. That is why I like American way of thinking. Life is not a sprint but a marathon. Students who have passion for learning than for grades win.</p>
<p>So Jed had to keep asking her to stop making nasty generalizations about Westerners. Hmm. Makes you wonder if he doubted if she actually loved him, since he’s not Chinese and was “Western” enough to object to her methods and “Western” enough to not partake in the work of making the girls do all those hours of lessons and practice.</p>
<p>I think that what happens when you make being #1 the goal, is that everyone becomes your enemy. That goal is such a driving and ruthless one that it requires a single-minded focus. It’s hard to maintain that focus when so many others around you don’t, so they have to be demonized somehow. And those few who are just like you, will become your competition and therefore your enemies.</p>
<p>Sorry for butting in, but why are so many people here speculating about Amy Chua’s relationship with her husband, her children’s future successes and mental health, and the inner workings of their minds–all things that are not addressed in the book–WITHOUT even having read the book? In other words, making assumptions based on assumptions based on sweeping generalizations?</p>
<p>Some of us have read the book, Ghostt. </p>
<p>TheGFG: THe husband may have been western enough to object to her methods, but he merely stepped back and let it all happen. I cannot IMAGINE my husband standing by while I emotionally abused our children like that, nor would I idly stand by if he did the same. It sounds like he checked out of the whole thing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Some parents have managed to get their children to like reading and learning as an enjoyable activity. So then the children are not really sacrificing current pleasure for more pleasure in the future when they read and learn recreationally – no “tiger parent slave driving” needed for the children to do well in school.</p>
<p>Chua included information on her husband’s reactions in her article and book. People are responding to those facts she herself provided about her home life. So while we are indeed speculating, we are doing so with some data as a basis.</p>
<p>It’s not like she, the perfect mother, was going to admit her kids were messed up if they were, or that her marriage was in trouble if it was, right? That’s why we speculate. Besides, this type of conversation is what people do on internet discussion forums, Ghostt. Why are you on here if you disapprove?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Talk about a generalization. What exactly does that mean, anyway?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We have this method as well, though my children are quite small.</p>
<p>I think the question is not, whether or not any sacrifice is necessary for financial success. Certainly, some people are driven to both succeed in academics and in business, for their own sakes, but most people like one much more than the other, and yet to be really successful you need both. So at some point you have to sacrifice some pleasure for higher rewards of pleasure later (for example, I am presently spending less time cooking good food for my kids and myself, and more time studying for the GRE). Studying for the GRE is fun, but not as fun for me as is cooking knackerbrod for dinner and herring chowder from scratch.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t count an adult’s pleasure as more than a child’s pleasure, and I also don’t think an exceedingly high income contributes to much more pleasure than a sufficient one, so my answer is, I’m not willing to inflict any pain on my children to teach them lessons beyond what is necessary to help them learn how to be conscious citizens able to contribute to society at a concrete level. I view that as my responsibility to them and society. Beyond that, I will inform them what I expect of them but I’m not going to use punishments to enforce those expectations.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I don’t view my role as a parent to provide a whole lot more than food, shelter, and enrichment for future self-sufficiency, so for us, watching Super Why, playing educational games on the computer, eating ice-cream, and going on nature walks are huge rewards. It’s not like I would have to withdraw these as a punishment: they are not automatic rights, so I can use them as incentives.</p>
<p>Of course kids get toys and fun things, within reason, but not at random. It’s Christmas, Eid, and birthdays. Okay, and when mommy spots something she always wanted and which is educational and on sale. Like the marble track I got on Amazon the other day.</p>
<p>I agree with ParentofIvyHope. I have two sons, and they couldn’t be more different. For example, we offered the older one music lessons at 2 or 3 different points in his childhood. He was very clear that he had no interest in learning to play an instrument. This was striking, because he was interested in just about everything else. The younger son was clearly interested in music from the time he was a few weeks old, and as a toddler he was making “music” with any object he could find that he could use to make an interesting noise, sometimes “playing” one object with one hand, another object with the other hand, and a third with one foot. He plays two instruments and would like to play three others.</p>
<p>Bloom’s classic study on talent development:</p>
<p>[Amazon.com:</a> Developing Talent in Young People (9780345315090): Dr. Benjamin Bloom: Books](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Developing-Talent-Young-People-Benjamin/dp/034531509X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1295891124&sr=8-1]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/Developing-Talent-Young-People-Benjamin/dp/034531509X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1295891124&sr=8-1)</p>
<p>would not support Chua’s approach. He studied young people who had achieved, by their early 20’s, at the highest levels in one of several different spheres (piano, tennis, math, etc.). He found that the pursuit of the talent was child-driven. Parental support was an essential ingredient, but parents were not the driving force. Their role was to seek out the best teachers/coaches and make the lessons/training possible. </p>
<p>I think that the most telling anecdote is the one about Chua calling one of her daughters names because the girl refused to try caviar.</p>
<p>TheGFG, I disapprove because people are judging this woman, her culture, and her children on the basis of little to no evidence, and with a certainty most scientists reserve for explaining gravity. “I haven’t read the book, but this woman is an abusive monster and her daughters will grow up to be suicidal automatons, just like the children of every other Chinese family that stifles creativity and promotes total obedience,” is an offensive and ignorant statement, and there have been several variations of it in this thread.</p>
<p>It’s fine to say you disagree with a certain parenting method, or to say it is harmful, but psychoanalyzing Chua’s daughters and calling her actions criminal without knowing her personally is too much, imo.</p>
<p>I’m not Asian, by the way, nor have I read the book. Which is why I choose to withhold judgment. Sweeping generalizations and baseless speculation are not good arguments, especially not when they’re used to support a negative opinion.</p>
<p>
Personally, I give the benefit of the doubt for the name-calling. To evaluate that, you really have to be there and see what the family dynamic is like. To me, the telling anecdote was renting a piano space for hours of practice during family vacations. if that was really typical of this family’s vacations, I have no problem think that they’re nuts.</p>
<p>The no play-dates thing is what made me think they’re nuts.</p>
<p>I never had a play-date. Because it’s a strange “modern” concept where parents have to engineer the kid’s life. We played with whatever neighborhood kid was around. No reservations needed. Play-date, hooey.</p>
<p>I don’t get the impression that these girls were running around outside with the neighborhood kids, either.</p>