<p>
[quote]
lskinner, I think it's more that the pattern of activities cries out "Momma's boy" rather than the fact that it is common in Asian families. I mean, what are the odds that all those kids would just naturally be drawn to piano, violin, tennis, track and math club?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you think that a black applicant who did piano, violin, tennis, track, and math club would be labeled a "momma's boy" and have it held against him or her?</p>
<p>
[quote]
And why do all those parents make their kids learn piano and violin, anyway?
<p>
[quote]
Isn't it possible that the "discounting" (after years of superlative recognition) of certain extracurricular activities is based on learning from experience, including the incredible attrition in the number of "passionate" participants as soon as the "prize" has been bagged.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sure it's possible. But so what?</p>
<p>My only point is that in many situations, it's not unethical to "game" the system in order to avoid being a victim of discrimination.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My only point is that in many situations, it's not unethical to "game" the system in order to avoid being a victim of discrimination.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Strange logic! </p>
<p>We DO have different definitions of the term "ethics." The "only" regret you seem to have is that tangible benefits of selfish gamesmanship have lost their mythical powers.</p>
<p>lskinner, I think what Xiggi is saying is that the only reason these kids were force-fed piano, violin, tennis, etc. in the first place was to game the system - not because of genuine interest or for the inherent benefit of the activity but in the belief that those activities would magically open the gates to selective colleges which would reward the students who were artificially made into that mold. Now that it doesn't work, the actual complaint is about the withdrawal of advantage achieved by the previous means of gaming the system. You do seem to favor utilizing less than candid means of achieving entry into those schools, e.g. by faking an interest in certain activities cunningly selected to fool the adcoms. Is a failure to reward that type of behavior "racism?"</p>
<p>
[quote]
the only reason these kids were force-fed piano, violin, tennis, etc. in the first place was to game the system - not because of genuine interest or for the inherent benefit of the activity but in the belief that those activities would magically open the gates to selective colleges which would reward the students who were artificially made into that mold.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Possible, but I doubt it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Now that it doesn't work, the actual complaint is about the withdrawal of advantage achieved by the previous means of gaming the system.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Whose complaint? It's not my complaint.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You do seem to favor utilizing less than candid means of achieving entry into those schools, e.g. by faking an interest in certain activities cunningly selected to fool the adcoms. Is a failure to reward that type of behavior "racism?"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>To me, "racism" means treating somebody differently based on their race. If an admissions committee assumes that all violin players of any race are trying to game the system, it is not being racist. If an admissions committee makes this assumption, but only with Asian applicants, it is being racist. It's as simple as that.</p>
<p>Anyway, you haven't answered my question:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do you think that a black applicant who did piano, violin, tennis, track, and math club would be labeled a "momma's boy" and have it held against him or her?
<p>Lskinner, this forum has heard the refrain more times we can count. Repeating it over and over won't make it true. </p>
<p>If you are concinced of your facts, you should seek the appropriate platform for your claims. Even if you were able to convince everyone who reads the boards, you would still have accomplished ... nothing. There is a place for political, legal, and social activism, but this is not it!</p>
<p>Climbing a ladder erected by others and then attempting to remove it won't be accomplished that easily. Where are your lawyers and your activists?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Lskinner, this forum has heard the refrain more times we can count. Repeating it over and over won't make it true.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What refrain is that?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Climbing a ladder erected by others and then attempting to remove it won't be accomplished that easily. Where are your lawyers and your activists?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Dude, I have absolutely no idea what your point is.</p>
<p>"I think what Xiggi is saying is that the only reason these kids were force-fed piano, violin, tennis, etc. in the first place was to game the system - not because of genuine interest or for the inherent benefit of the activity but in the belief that those activities would magically open the gates to selective colleges.."</p>
<p>Hmmm. I don't know about the tennis part, but that was not my understanding of why the preference for violin & piano, which is a fairly long-standing tradition in many Asian families, preceding the more competitive college admissions era that we're in now. </p>
<p>I actually have no idea - and I'm not even sure that was what Xiggi was saying - but that seemed to be the gist of his comments. I'd be interested in any illumination anyone might bring to bear on this question.</p>
<p>Lskinner, aren't you part of the group that aces the critical reading of the SAT? If you don't get my point, that's just too bad because I am done with this conversation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Lskinner, aren't you part of the group that aces the critical reading of the SAT?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Honestly, I can't remember which sections of the verbal SAT I "aced." However, I would urge you to consider the possibility that the problem lies in the incoherency of your posts rather than other peoples' comprehension skills.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Lskinner, this forum has heard the refrain more times we can count. Repeating it over and over won't make it true.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What refrain are you talking about? Honestly, I think that you are arguing with your own demons, as opposed to arguing with me.</p>
<p>Why not spell out in a few words what you think my position is?</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you don't get my point, that's just too bad because I am done with this conversation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I certainly won't miss your ad hominem attacks.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But, heck all hope is not lost ... there is time to learn about non-solitary activities that extol the values of team spirit, true leadership, and selfishness.
<p><a href="lskinner:">quote</a>
The question (actually questions) that you quoted in post # 72:
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You didn't ask any questions. You opined about admissions "racism" and invited what could only be further speculation, unless it is your belief that the posters to this thread are admissions officers who decide the fate of Asian applications. Is there something you contest in the supposedly unresponsive post #72?</p>
<h2>kluge: **I think it's more that the pattern of activities cries out "Momma's boy" rather than the fact that it is common in Asian families. I mean, **what are the odds that all those kids would just naturally be drawn to piano, violin, tennis, track and math club? Just as a random factor, wouldn't you expect some to be interested in saxophone, bass, wrestling and drama club? I'm sure there are kids of other ethnicities who pay the price for the stereotype as well. (Incidentally - I know lots of Asian kids who don't fit the stereotype; what we're addressing is whether kids who do fit it are discriminated against. Obviously Shaw thinks that they are; I don't have a reason to question that.) And why do all those parents make their kids learn piano and violin, anyway?"</h2>
<p>One thing one of my Chinese friends mentioned was that the Asians in America are a different, less diverse group than the ones in Asia due to the "Brain Drain." The ones that emigrated to the U.S. were only the most educated, perhaps due to immigration rules. But anyway, it's not a big surprise that the kids of doctors, engineers, and scientists are interested in math, science, and classical music. Genetics, I think, is a pretty big driving factor although I'm sure the value system augments it. So they are just being true to themselves, not being "momma's boys." </p>
<p>It's funny, though, that anyone should have to apologize for academic excellence.</p>
<p>As for the tennis issue, the sport seems to be more compatible with academic excellence than most. I was involved in various sports--I ended dropping everything but tennis eventually because I didn't have to do it year-round to be good at it. Also, I wasn't completely exhausted after playing tennis. (And I also did math club, piano, etc. although I am not
Asian.)</p>
<p>Epiphany suggests that Asian families have a long standing tradition of enrolling their kids in violin/piano programs that precedes any competitive college admissions craziness. She is absolutely correct. Much of that Asian love of music education for very young kids comes from the movement founded by Dr. Shinichi Suzuki in the 1940s. WHile struggling himself to learn German as an adult, and after being asked by a friend how Japanese kids were able to master the difficult Japanese language, he had a revelation about using language acquisition as a model for teaching violin. Very different from traditional methods, his approach begins with observation, watching, listening, and imitating. Parents accompany the kids in lessons and guide them at home. It becomes a shared experience, and should be only positive without ciriticsm. (Just as a parent doesn't criticize a baby learing to speak -- he claps & encourages every attempt while repeating back the word with proper pronunciation.) Group interaction and cooperation are essential. All these ideas stem from Suzuki modeling his approach on natural language acquisition. There is also a connection to martial arts teaching approaches, with intense focus on the tinniest movements and the subtleties needed to play with proper form & thus achieve the best sound.</p>
<p>Here is a quote from a Maxine Komlos article that explains, for me at least, why so many Asian parents put thier kids in violin training:
[quote]
Suzuki's aim is primarily to produce noble human beings through their musical training.
<p>I won't deny that as ivy success was achieved by so many Asian violinists, others in the community took notice & hoped for similar results with their own kids. But music training has been a treasured part of Asian traditions for a long time. I just don't like the assumptions that every Asian kid with a violin slung over his shoulder is a mama's boy. Perhaps in some posters experience, many are. Just as I wouldn't make the assumption that every boy involved in drama or musical theater is gay, despite our experience that the majority of boys who audition for those roles are, in fact, gay.</p>
<p>Great post, SS: One of your best ever, i.m.o., in its fullness, clarity, accuracy. You get an A, girl. :)</p>
<p>On a separate note, the same Suzuki training which you describe (& which my own children were trained in while very young, though not Asian!) is also something that can become something to 'overcome' or at least transform as the musician matures. The lyrical pieces of composers from the Romantic period require a very different approach, & some young musicians have difficulty growing out of the 'precision' mindset if their teachers do not pick up on that need.</p>
<p>My non-Asian son is a dedicated violinist, not a "mama's boy", not gay. In fact, orchestras are fabulous places for meeting girls. That's not why I wrote, just funny aside. NOT anxious about how son is perceived, though he was when young. There were certainly stereotypes.</p>
<p>He has been involved with Suzuki (though not a beginning so he did not have problem epiphany describes), and because of our geographical location, played along side of many Asian kids. Many were initially forced by parents, just as many boys are forced into sports by their fathers. True involvement and commitment cannot be forced. The highest achieving musician of my son's friends, a Davidson scholar, highest category, is already a professional level violinist and composer, is not Asian. I don't think playing the violin is much of a boost in admissions unless there is true love and dedication.</p>
<p>About people who move, become Miss New Jersey, whatever, it's fine with me; I don't think they are 'scammimg", but I feel sorry for these kids. With so many truly fine institutions of learning in the US putting a label ahead of truly developing the self seems a sad enterprise. I am NOT talking about the many wonderful kids here who naturally qualify for ivies, but those who deprive themselves of the experiences most nourishing to them to attain what is, for them, the equivalent of a Coach purse. (NOT this for kids who pursue their true callings and find these institutions the best fit for their authentic lives.) Since success depends so much on internal motivation I wonder about kids whose only self-definition is external.</p>