Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother - new book about Chinese parenting

<p>@@ barrons, way to miss the point. If you played with whatever neighborhood kids were around, that’s the same concept. The point was - you had time to run around and do “unproductive” stuff like play with Legos or climb trees or hang from the monkey bars or make up plays or play ball. </p>

<p>I can certainly see how name-calling might sound like one thing in black and white and another thing in real life. For example, we jokingly call our son “the slacker” - but anyone who knows our family dynamic would know that it’s done with affection, because he is the complete opposite of a slacker, he’s very earnest and hard-working, and we all know that and it’s said with a wink. However, the things that Chua quoted didn’t fall in that gray area of “oh, well, it was said with a wink and a smile.” She talked about not letting her small child go to the bathroom or get a snack, that she had to stay up for hours past her bedtime to practice this stupid piano piece. She talked about shaming and humiliating them for an A- or for anything that wasn’t #1 in the class. Nowhere does she indicate that she is sorry or ashamed that she acted like this, and nowhere does she really indicate that she understands that it would have been possible to have had high standards without meanness. She seems to act as though the only options out there are western-style permissive-parenting they-can’t-add-but-whoa-whoa-feelings or her style of parenting which is not only high-expectation but high-harshness. I’ve read the book. As I have said ad nauseum, she has very little epiphany at the end.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Why can’t I judge it harshly? That’s the fun of being American :-). I judge people harshly when I perceive they are wrapped up in their children’s becoming sports stars to the exclusion of all else, or to a level where sports dominates all semblance of a family life. I judge the Kardashians or the parents of the Jersey Shore people as being, frankly, white trash. Why wouldn’t I also judge this subculture, such as it is, harshly?</p>

<p>I actually answered your question in my post. I don’t like baseless speculation and generalizations.</p>

<p>Pea, in #902, posted a link to commentary by Courtland Milloy, which included a statement that sometimes when Amy Chua looked at the “teeth marks on the piano,” she was seized with doubt. Milloy says “Doubt about what? That bite marks on a keyboard means that somebody really, really hates piano lessons?” </p>

<p>Also, it’s not clear to me what would happen when a high school had multiple students all of whom <em>had</em> to be #1 in every class (except gym and drama). Mutual assured destruction?</p>

<p>barrons,
“play-date” is today’s catch-all term for hanging out with other kids your age, when it requires your mom to drive you or arrange a time around all your other obligations to do it.</p>

<p>Anyway, I can’t imagine Ms. Chua allowing her young Ds to wander around the New Haven neighborhood on their own looking for friends to play with, so that issue is moot.</p>

<p>Well, that’s why it’s my judgment (horrors! judgment!) that despite Amy Chua’s outstanding academic credentials, she’s not all that bright. To not figure out that different children might need different things – I mean, duh.</p>

<p>Ghostt-</p>

<p>The woman brought it on herself when she wrote the book. When you put yourself out in public, you are going to draw criticism, and especially when the tone of the book to a certain extent, and the articles she is interviewed, makes claims about superiority, it is like a politician who denounces an opponent as immoral and then is shocked when their own pecadilos are criticized. She wrote the book and to expect no criticism is kind of illogical.</p>

<p>More importantly, people are going to criticize because they feel they have seen the negative side of what Ms. Chua claims to have done. Unless you live in a bubble, people have seen the kid with parents like Ms. Chua and have seen some of the negatives they are talking about, and a lot of this is born out by real research studies on the cost of this kind of pressure. Talk to music teachers, who will tell you of students who literally are crying in lessons because they are having a hard time with something, and begging the teacher to either switch to something else because of fear of what their parent will do if they haven’t mastered it, or tell the parent they finished it so they don’t have to work on it any more. Talk to college counselors about the downside of these kinds of crazy expectations. Talk to people who have worked with kids who were raised like this, who have an incredible problem interacting in a group, or figuring out that in the real world, ‘b eing out for #1’ makes for a hard time (want an example of this? In the music world, among the kids raised like Ms. Chua is doing who go into music, who believe everything is a competition to be #1, that only being a soloist is real and so forth, they end up in deep trouble, because music for the most part is not a competitive sport; not to mention with an attitude like that, even if they had the makings of a good soloist (most of them don’t, by a long shot, another consequence of bad notions), they have such an attitude that no one would want to work with them. Music competitive, but it isn’t war, it isn’t the kind of idiotic supremacy that Ms. Chua and her kind teach).</p>

<p>As far as cultural relativism, which is basically in the claim people shouldn’t criticize “her culture”, there is a line there. In some cultures, it is perfectly okay to hit your wife or beat your children, in many places those are not only against popular culture, but illegal. Recently, a judge got into a lot of trouble in a divorce case that involved a Muslim couple from Morocco living in the states. The judge denied one of the grounds of divorce, that the husband raped the wife, on the grounds that in Moroccan culture and law apparently a husband cannot be accused of rape (and before anyone get too smug about that, it wasn’t until the 1970’s in the US that a woman could accuse her husband of rape). An appeals court threw it out, saying that culture and custom has its bounds.</p>

<p>While I am not sure anything Ms. Chua did was legally actionable or if child services would find it to be so, that doesn’t mean criticism can be cut off by saying ‘that is her culture’. People criticize others all the time, and while it may be distasteful, there is nothing sacrosanct about cultural beliefs. In Jewish tradition circumcision is required by religious law, but there is a pretty spirited debate in some quarters whether that is religious law that should be obeyed, or barbarism (and it also is in the secular domain as well).</p>

<p>And quite frankly, by implicitly and explicitly degrading the ‘lax’ way others raise their kids, it became fair game for others to criticize her and the ‘culture’ that underlies her methods, you can’t have it both ways.</p>

<p>Have you read the whole thread, Ghostt? People have made thousands of positive and negative comments about Chua’s parenting philosophy as exemplified by her treatment of her own children. Yet NO ONE has maligned Chinese culture nor all Chinese people, and no one has maligned the Chua girls, since obviously we all realize they can’t help who their mother is. But if you put your family life on public display for the purposes of bragging about your brand of parenting as superior and/or for the purpose of turning a profit, then you are agreeing to allow people to analyze it and decide whether they think it is truly superior or not. This involves making judgments about actual and possible outcomes. For this people are using her BOOK and her ARTICLE, which is as much evidence as anyone is going to have without living in her house.</p>

<p>@musicprnt, I am not talking about cultural relativism. And I don’t think Chua’s brand of parenting is inherently Chinese–it is precisely that sort of blanket statement, in fact, that I object to–so really, these are not arguments I can respond to.</p>

<p>@TheGFG, I see where you’re coming from, but that’s not what I was trying to say either. I was talking mainly about 1. the people who’ve only read the WSJ article, yet feel qualified to analyze the contents of the book, and 2. the endless speculation about, for example, Chua’s husband, which some people use as basis for some incredibly contrived arguments. Coming up with something that may or may not be true, e.g. “Chua thinks her husband is too “westernized” (strange term, btw) and/or has brainwashed him into some inhumane Chinese parental doctrine,” and using it to support some argument that is presumably rooted in reality seems quite pointless to me.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Amy Chua does, indeed, think this type of parenting is inherently Chinese (even though she acknowledges that there are parents of all nationalities, etc. who are tough / with high expectations). She explicitly links it to how she grew up. Why do you suppose that is? She didn’t name it Chua-Family-Parenting, or Yale-Law-Professor parenting.</p>

<p>To me, it’s comparable to a politician and the hands on/hands off issue of their marriage, families, etc. You can’t call yourself a Mamma or Pappa grizzly, or Hockey-parent, or claim that God guides your child-rearing, and then claim foul when the press covers your out-of-wedlock child or grandchild or extra-marital dalliance.</p>

<p>Similarly, Chua can’t possibly write a book about so-called Chinese child-rearing, and not be able to defend either the Chinese element or the child-rearing consequences. Go write a book about traveling in Istanbul on $50/day if you don’t want people scrutinizing your family.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Because Americans are drawn to the idea of clearly delineated cultural patterns. A book about Chua’s strange parenting techniques wouldn’t have sold nearly as well as a confessional book written about the scary parenting style prevalent in China that happens to be written by Chua–both a member of the othered group, an insider, and a kind of translator, a persona just American enough to convey the scariness of Chinese parenting in a way Americans can understand. By emphasizing her ethnicity, she is capitalizing on American attitudes toward China, basically.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Really? Only Americans? There isn’t anyone who generalizes that “western parenting” isn’t overly permissive and / or touchy-feeling and / or overly concerned with self-esteem at the expense of achievement?</p>

<p>Ghostt-</p>

<p>I don’t know why you believe the criticism is without basis or fact. If the articles were written by someone else without her knowledge and she said “I was horrified that they took stuff out of context”, you might have a point, but she was an active participant in the articles and brought up the incidents people were criticizing, like ripping up a card a child made for them as being ‘not good enough’ or witholding water or the bathroom as inducement to learn the piece (btw, if a cop did that to a suspect to get them to talk, or a soldier did that questioning someone, they could be charged for doing so; if it is illegal to do so to a suspect under arrest, why would doing that to a child to force them to learn a piece be a good thing, even assuming it isn’t illegal?). She is being criticized for what she put out there, and what is interesting is that people reading the book on this thread have said that the book isn’t all that different, that she does little backpedalling or acknowledging that she may have gone too far. </p>

<p>I also don’t think people are criticizing “Chinese culture”, the real criticism there is Chua implying that what she is doing is Chinese culture (she calls it “chinese mothering”). People are using the term because she did, and I doubt many on this thread believe that it is unique to Chinese culture or even something that could be called that; it is simply she used the term.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’d replace Americans with humans. Talk about generalizations…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I have no attitude toward the Chinese; I definitely have one towards Chua based on the parenting examples that she gave of herself</p>

<p>No, of course Americans aren’t the only people who like to generalize, and in fact acceptable generalizations are sometimes much less benign in some other countries (look at what the press can get away with in any given country; that’s a good indicator of socially acceptable prejudices there). I’m talking about Americans because the book is making a stir in the USA and is to an extent reflective of American social realities.</p>

<p>@musicprnt, I agree with your points.</p>

<p>‘Chua thinks her husband is too “westernized” (strange term, btw)’</p>

<p>Of course he’s too westernized. He’s Reform, right? ;)</p>

<p>"A book about Chua’s strange parenting techniques wouldn’t have sold nearly as well as a confessional book written about the scary parenting style prevalent in China that happens to be written by Chua–both a member of the othered group, an insider, and a kind of translator, a persona just American enough to convey the scariness of Chinese parenting in a way Americans can understand. By emphasizing her ethnicity, she is capitalizing on American attitudes toward China, basically. "</p>

<p>Isn’t Chua from the Phillipines? If there is any real cultural content here, isn’t it less about CHINA and more about Overseas Chinese? Less about Confucianism and exams to become scholar bureaucrats, and more about the insecurities of a marginal, insecure, but affluent minority, forced to live by its wits among the less educated and less commercial (and yeah, I DO see the parallels, vey iz mir)</p>

<p>For those who think we shouldn’t be commenting on the book unless we have read it I just went to Amazon and was able to read the first chapter for free. I read it twice to try to figure out what I thought of it. <em>sigh</em></p>

<p>It’s disjointed, it’s almost like a stream of consciousness. It’s full of stereotyping although I’m not sure if Amy Chua meant it like that. It’s almost like she wrote without thinking but she does rattle off offensive stereotyping like she’s reading from a grocery list.</p>

<p>An exerpt:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Where did all this stereotyping come from? Crafts leads nowhere? The drums leads to drugs? It seems to have escaped her notice that she picked the piano for Sophia, rather than the other way around.</p>

<p>I don’t want to pay $26.00 for the book. Maybe I’ll go to the library sometime and look at it, but I think I’d just get frustrated with it, it doesn’t seem very insightful.</p>

<p>I have read that her husband objected to her characterization of him in the book. I imagine that he first tried to dissuade her from publishing it at all. I wonder how her daughters reacted. Every single teenager I know would be horrified at the thought of a book being written about his/her family life, even ordinary family life. I know one teenage girl who was furious when her mother answered the phone and told a boy who was calling that the girl was in the shower. Apparently, that is very private information, not to be revealed! Does anyone here know a teen who would not object strongly to any book being written about him/her, especially one with the theme: I am the perfect mother and I have raised perfect children.</p>

<p>I can’t imagine putting young girls in the public eye, as she has. Photographs of her very attractive daughters are all over the web, and their school is identified. It is easy to learn their address. Maybe I’m paranoid, but I would never allow this. I am the mother who checked “no” on the school form that asked about classroom photographs of S1, when he was very young. (I relented when the teacher let me know, in the nicest possible way, that I was the only one who hadn’t given permission, and it was making things difficult.) I have forbidden my sons to be in any videos that are uploaded to youtube. Am I crazy, or is Chua?</p>

<p>And I don’t think this is the same situation that politicians face. There is no requirement for academics to make their families public; politicians are expected to do so. In fact, it is very unusual for academics to do what Chua has done.</p>