Why American Mothers are Superior
thejuliagroup.com
thejuliagroup.com
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2098301 and http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2101163
Then today the top story is poking fun of "advertising words" which is an intellectualized kick in the face to the techniques that marketers use to draw you in.
And yet meanwhile we're all discussing for the 5th time the WSJ linkbait article on "Chinese Mothers" that exists for the sole purpose of promoting Amy Chao's book the "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" from which WSJ's original article was copy and pasted.
She arrived at #6 on Amazon's top sellers today.
I don't really see what point you are trying to make.
-To understand the mentality of a Chinese parent, you need to know a few things. First, the obvious one child policy, and the expectation that this one child will support their children but also their parents and grandparents (no social security, minuscule pensions and a non-existent safety net). This puts an enormous pressure on the individual to have a stable and high wage job. Lots of people on these boards are in startups (or would like to be), but few Chinese nationals are willing to take that route due to the immense risks involved. They're gambling not only their personal wealth but also the survival of their family.
-School is brutal, particularly college admissions. Each student at the end of high school takes something called the gaokao. Imagine the SAT on steroids (2 days long) that you only take one and almost wholly determines what "tier" of college you get admitted into. You can take it once a year, and if you fail, you have a second chance one year later (the intervening year is usually spent studying 14+ hrs a day). You pour a gazillion college-bound kids into this crucible of death, with only a scant few slots at the other end. Even for the student goes abroad to study, they've been indoctrinated with the cutthroat and "success at all costs" mentality necessary to get ahead in China. It's a numbers game, and the numbers are stacked to make your life hell.
What does this have to do with obsessive parents? Take these last two facts and mix in some historical perspective. Many of these parents either lived through or are sufficiently proximate to the turmoil of the 1960's and 1970's to know how brutal life can be for those that do not get ahead. It's not the American poverty of temp labor and living in a trailer park; it's the poverty of starving to death. It's the poverty of not having shelter from the cold, of having zero access to medical care. While this is less true of today's China, the fear of this poverty survives, even for those in relative affluence (think of your grandparents that lived through the depression and still are obsessively thrifty).
I can understand why these parents are monomaniacal in ensuring (or trying to ensure) a better life for their kids. With grueling competition, a one-child policy, scant social safety nets and a vivid memory of how brutal China can be, it makes sense.
I would suspect that children need a balanced mix of both: discipline to learn the basics in whichever field they want to get into, coupled with freedom to explore their own interests. I suspect that today's american school culture stresses creativity to the point of ignoring the fundamentals. The good thing is that there are self-correcting mechanisms built into the american system as opposed to the chinese system where the children and the parents too, rarely get much of a say.
The Last Psychiatrist reminds me a lot of Gary Brecher's War Nerd blog. Both offer a raw cut-through-the-BS point of view.
>... my husband said the same thing
Being a parent and having raised a couple of kids myself, the motive is not just for college, but to launch you better in life. Not all my siblings went to college, and those that didn't are what I would call well launched.
I am not surprised this blog is auto-killed.
I'm also not surprised that it's auto-killed.
I'd love to see these anecdotes turned into evidence.
Give it 20 years.
That's not going to happen. This is a pissing contest between Olympic level pissers.
Me, I'd like to see these two families in a wrestling match - just the mothers and daughters obviously, the fathers don't seem to have much of a competitive streak.
She is trying to say that the difference between her kids and the chinese children are that her kids turned out to be "gifted" without pressure from her to succeed. Chinese children are "gifted" as a result of strict and never-satisfied parents. She's saying that if her children turned out to be just average, it sounds like she would be perfectly fine with that, as long as her kids were happy.
The main point of the article is that american kids are given more freedom to explore their true interests and aren't formed into the model ivy-league applicant.
These labels don't advance the conversation much for me.
Will it be good for your soul? Dunno, consult your local cleric. Will it be good for your mind? YMMV. It may not make you thinner, but it will make HN thinner.
In another community I frequented for years, the set of mostly-verboten topics grew to include stuff like cat declawing, ownership of TVs or SUVs, atheism, male circumcision, Israel / Palestine, and fiat currency.
Until very recently in India, being anything other than a doctor, engineer or MBA meant earning salaries so poor that you'd end up depending on your children for financial support when you retired. This in turn drove you to spend as much money as you could on your children's education because it was an investment in your own future, while also serving as a badge of pride when your kids came home with straight As. So, you'd find folks who instead of trying to build a meager pension, would instead pool all their resources into a college education for their children. Indeed, many old Indian movies use the image of a son who abandons his parents in search of a glitzy life in the city to portray his villainy.
These professions were not natural callings but the only option out of an existence of drudgery. Things are changing now, with the advent of the BPO industry, and the subsequent higher earning power which can then fund other circles of vocations. Consequently you see several guys opting for the arts or other paths less followed.
o Amy Chua did not come up with the Title of the WSJ article.
o The WSJ went out of their way to string the most controversial elements.
Think of it as LinkBaiting.. They certainly got a lot of attention.
o The actual book is much more nuanced, and, to some degree,
comes to different conclusions than the article about the true
nature of parenthood.
See Jeff Yang's Great Review of the "True Story" behind the "Chinese Mother" essay at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/01/13/...
It is not common. Every Chinese mother I know (that would be quite a few) found the Amy Chua article to be repulsive. Just like the American moms did, except that they knew people would equate them with Chua's ideas so it makes them even angrier. My own wife (a Chinese mom) and her friends and relatives have been circulating the Chua article and talking about it and the consensus is a universal "WTF is wrong with this woman?!"
Then you read that the Wall Street Journal article was, at least to a certain extent, not representative of the actual tone of the book and you realize that this piece, so disliked by real Chinese mothers is an exaggeration of the whole phenomenon.
People like the mom in this linked article are responding to an exaggeration of a caricature (and should be aware of this, though, from their own defensive and annoyed tone I suspect are not) and it strikes a chord because people are too sensitive to perceived criticism of things that matter deeply to their psyches... like the job they do raising their kids.
So the WSJ takes an extreme point of view, exaggerates it to fit a caricature of a certain racial stereotype, people get annoyed at this mostly made up thing and start reacting angrily and the WSJ and those involved in the book make money off of the whole mess. Shameful.
All those 'quite a few' Chinese mothers you know, you said were repulsed. But how many of them fit the description?
I have to admit, most (not all) of the Chinese moms I know are rather more liberal and open-minded about child rearing. Still much more grade/achievement focused than most American moms I know, but not as extreme as this Chua woman. I mean, even the more strict Chinese moms in my social circles wouldn't prevent their kids from attending sleep overs, as one example. Yes the kids study a lot (and do test prep plus attend Chinese school on weekends) and play an instrument (with much longer practice times than one might expect) and would be chewed out for anything less than an A (A- for the easy going moms) but still... not as draconian and goal oriented as Chua is portrayed the article.
With one mom in particular, who is one of the more disgusted with this article (she called the other day and we spent a good half hour talking about the WSJ article), I know her sons consider her a pretty typical "chinese mother", and probably moan about her to their friends (I'm their uncle/godparent, btw), and while she is strict and expects a lot she is still nothing as bad as the caricature in that article.
Kind of inherent in casual, internet conversation... hard to avoid.
The is an old saying that we most hate in others what we most hate in ourselves.
A number of Chinese friends of mine say that they recognized Amy Chua's description, it is how they were raised. So certainly some out there fit the description. Whether or not they think they do.
...and it strikes a chord because people are too sensitive to perceived criticism of things that matter deeply to their psyches...
AKA cognitive dissonance. You're absolutely right.
I have earned Cs on tests that fell during tech week (crunch time for school theater the week before opening night, with build crew and rehearsals lasting until 10pm).
What I propose (and what she proposes) is that there's nothing wrong with that. Sacrificing my instrument and moving to choir taught me what is it enjoy making music. Those tests I bombed aren't pretty, but in the performances the following weekend, I worked closely with a group of talented people under incredible constraints and unpredictable circumstances to pull off a smooth show, and it was both the greatest thrill and the greatest lesson in teamwork I'd ever experienced.
I've no doubt that sufficient emotional and physical pain applied by a parent could coerce any child to earn a 4.0 and to master an instrument, but that kind of empty, forced skill is not something we should aspire to. Let people do what they love. Even if it weren't for programming and respectable grades, I could make a living with an IATSE card. They pay and the hours would be terrible, but at least I would like what I do.
You will never regret jamming with friends. A test is just a blip.
I'd much prefer seeing the two systems applied to two disadvantaged children, and see what works better.
And the vaguely racist assumption that Asian students know their facts but have no imagination:
<<<<<<<< When I ask the latter questions such as, “If you were going to redesign programming language X, what would you do?”
They will tell me what X does in great detail but not answer the question. American students are more likely to jump in with ideas about how to change X, replete with statements like “X sucks because…” >>>>>>>>>
I went to school with the child of one of the original UNIX developers. He submitted a word processed paper in grade school (late 70's). I can remember him reading GEB in the back of Chemistry class. He has gone on to do wonderful things - and I never saw evidence of the 'Chinese Mom' upbringing... He always seemed to be a very balanced, healthy human being - doing what he wanted to do.
Richard Feynman didn't have a Chinese mother either...
So we all have these anecdotes - what Chua is talking about is something different. It is not merely anecdotal - it is why there is high unemployment and at the same time tech companies in NYC starving for engineers.
Thee is a link for me in the 'Chinese mom' argument (not Chua's per se but the tiger parenting her daughter pushes against) and Gladwell's Outlier's argument.
Even if you are a genius it takes "10,000 hours" of hard work. Some people are internally motivated enough to do it at a young age. Others need a 'Chinese mom' to turn the TV off and go through the piano piece one more time...
She is raising future college students.
I would say to all of those who are encouraging their kids to play violin merely for college application ammunition: People are only in college for 5 years. Much better to raise your children to be good people.
Would you rather raise your kid to have an active lifelong connection to unconscious being, art, and the eternal, or would you rather raise them so that they can put away their violin and have something to mention in passing at cocktail parties for the rest of their lives?
This choice of short term/long term focus applies to many aspects of education. It is the difference between merely raising a high status, suitably socialized drone versus a human being of substance.
As to which Amy Chua has chosen, only she can know. Having listened to her on interviews, I would say she claims the latter. I suspect that many who try to emulate such true success are unknowlingly choosing the former.
Many startups make the same choice!
But say we all became masters of the piano or violin. How could any of them make a living at it with such an oversupply?
I also wonder if the mothers of those who brought China its Cultural Revolution were of this superior variety.