• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Are Chinese Mothers Superior?

My wife is Hispanic and was raised pretty much as described in the OP. Anything less than a 95 was punished with grounding, extra chores etc, but she was never physically punished. Plenty of verbal abuse though. I met her in the summer before her Senior year in HS and her parents had slightly let go the reins a little bit because they trusted her (dummies!). By the end of her Senior year, she was pregnant. However, the way they raised her may have been a big factor in her finishing college in 2.5 years (after the birth of our daughter) and getting through Med School. So, in my limited experience, there's got to be something to heavy-handed parenting styles. But then we get back to the age old nature vs. nurture question. No doubt my wife is a smart cookie, but would she have achieved as much if her parents hadn't pushed her?
 
I see this sort of thing as a backlash against change. It was good enough for me, so it'll be good enough for you, even if I have to force you into it...
Very much so.

AFAIK, Confucius thought that string instuments were a stupid fad, and REAL music must be made with stone bells, as it always was.

Likewise my father thought that RPG's with fifty pages of tables and probabilistic calculations were for morons, and I should be playing chess. (He toned down his rhetoric when he found out all best students in my high school played D&D.)

Frankly, I am just opposite. I know world IS changing, and my children WILL engage in activities I do not an probably will not understand. To me it is not threatening at all.
 
Last edited:
You know what? Even being Asian and part Chinese, I simply can't condone this. Maybe it's being a "western kid", but the notion of having such a dictatorial parent horrifies me. It seems so utterly possesive as well as limiting.

That said, it's possible that Chua could be wrongly extrapolating from insufficient data if her own children do well. And as much as this amazes me, there are some kids who, oddly enough, thrive when being so restricted. My mother has a friend who's an utter control freak; as a side note, she's a friend because she helped mom get through a difficult pregnancy - me - and mom loves her. Anyway, when said woman raised one of her nieces, she openly bragged to mom and mom's siblings about just how controlling she was over said niece. She of course didn't see things that way, but that's essentially what it was; it was the exact sort of attitude we see here in Chua's article.

Mom's not permissive, but holy jeebus, even she said she was taken aback by what her friend said.

Thing is, this niece loves her aunt. And on top of that, she seems to agree that that is the way for a kid to be raised. She's not damaged, timid, or anything... in fact, what's striking is just how incredibly normal and average she is. Fine, she's not some prodigy or insanely successful person either, but that's my point: The perceived extremes are that such overly dictatorial parenting is either damaging, or the recipe for creating incredible success, but this gal is as middle of the bell curve as you can get (minus minor eccentricities, such as actually obeying a 9pm curfew... as a 20 year old! :eye-poppi (that's back when I knew her; she's now out of college and presumably living on her own... Now that I'm thinking about her, I think I'll ask mom for an update)).

Either this is a funny form of Stockholm Syndrome ;), or kids-teens-young adults are more resillient than we give them credit for.

Of course I have to allow for the fact that I may be missing something. But that said, I think I have a legitimate datapoint for the existence of such children. I myself would've gone crazy rebellious under such parenthood. I honestly think such a parent would've driven me to actually commit bad acts in my teen years (as opposed to the normal, run of the mill high-school aged antics that I actually indulged in).

My ultimate point is that there are indeed parents across the spectrum, but children, too, are spread across a spectrum. And some would thrive under such parenting, while others would burst or go all bad. It just blows my mind how many potential problems can exist in the enterprise of parenthood because, what if you're suited for being a parent leaning towards one end of the spectrum, but your child is obviously suited for the other? My mind boggles at the weight of responsibility parents carry.
 
Or when they put down that damn violin and never, ever play it again.

Bingo. I got put through something like that by my parents, although in their case it was physics that got shoved down my throat. As soon as I escaped that crap, I basically tried forgetting that physics even exists for the next 20 years.

Also, geesh, there's a part of me that instinctively cringes when reading about such stories. Far from making me go, "yeah, that's the right style of parenting", it makes me more like think, "child abuse".

Because, seriously, just like we keep talking each time bullying or whatnot comes up, abuse isn't only physical. And what she's describing in one place -- proudly, I must add -- is basically such abuse of her daughter that included not even letting her sleep or get food or water or go to the bathroom until she plays a tune right, even though she admits that it's a very hard part for someone young. And of course, yelling at said daughter until she lost her voice, and emotional blackmail.

_That_ is a parenting style to be proud of?

And generally what she's describing there is a glorified forced labour prison. Those are some kids which aren't effectively even allowed to have fun, or even their own desires and preferences. They have to grind all day to become the best at some arbitrary activity imposed upon them, and the only fun they're allowed to have is get praised when they get good at it. She's explicitly saying she overrides their children's desires and preferences, because she knows better what they should want. Etc.

And the degree of trying to make them socially dysfunctional is bewildering. They're not allowed to take part in pretty much any social activity, they're not allowed to have a boyfriend, they're not allowed to even take part in school activities like group plays, etc. W.T.H.?

Geeze, really, words fail me. If we don't allow parents to make their children dig in a mine so daddy can get his daily booze, then why do we allowed some kids to be made to grind the piano all day just so their mom can get her daily shot of feeling proud for someone else's achievements?
 
Yeah, and this is not a new discussion. I remember reading a New Yorker article in the 1980s about this stereotype parenting, and at the time it was called a "Jewish Mother."

I'll just call it "idiot mother who thrives on bragging and compliments about what her child did." You know, instead of having her own frikken achievements.

If you've read the piece, there's even that payoff in there. The reward for acting like a monster to make Lulu play a difficult piece on the piano is when she, the mother, gets compliments from other parents for her daughter's playing that piece.

That's it, really. That's what it's about. Some idiot who can't put in the grind to have something of their own worth bragging about as an adult, makes their kid do an unholy grind that they can they brag about.
 
My wife is Hispanic and was raised pretty much as described in the OP. Anything less than a 95 was punished with grounding, extra chores etc, but she was never physically punished. Plenty of verbal abuse though. I met her in the summer before her Senior year in HS and her parents had slightly let go the reins a little bit because they trusted her (dummies!). By the end of her Senior year, she was pregnant.

That actually reflects my experience too. After 18 years of having any kind of personality run over with a steamroller, so to speak, I didn't even know how to function without mommy or daddy or granny telling me what to do, or how to function in all but the most trivial social situation without them around. And a tendency to do the most stupid things just in case. If I had been a girl, I _would_ have gotten pregnant.

However, the way they raised her may have been a big factor in her finishing college in 2.5 years (after the birth of our daughter) and getting through Med School. So, in my limited experience, there's got to be something to heavy-handed parenting styles. But then we get back to the age old nature vs. nurture question. No doubt my wife is a smart cookie, but would she have achieved as much if her parents hadn't pushed her?

Wouldn't she?

I don't know your wife, but in my case there is exactly zero in what my parents shoved down my throat that is actually useful in my day job nowadays. Or in the MMO-style grind I had to do as a child, that even vaguely resembles any useful mode of solving real problems or thinking about new stuff.

If anything, the whole thing turned out to be a huge handicap that took me another decade to fully overcome. I essentially had no idea how to function in society or in a team. I had a reflex against having any kind of initiative, even to the extent of chucking the laundry in the washing machine, if mommy hadn't told me to and how, because I had had a very negative feedback to doing anything except what mommy tells me to. I still had a hard reflex against speaking to an adult, by now some actually younger than me, unless spoken to first. Elementary things that other children pick on the playground, were things I was still discovering with wide eyed surprise in the '30's.

Even the idea that the whole fun is grinding to be the best in something for the praise afterwards, as in the article, was actually a big shock to discover afterwards that it's not quite the way a real job or society works.

So is it actually that big an advantage to be pushed like that, at the expense of everything else?
 
And I use the word "talent" here pretty loosely.

(If anyone else compares one of those supposed genius piano playing kids (who only ever plays someone else's music) to classical composers who were actually writing their own work at the same age I'm going to spew)

I'd like to second this point.

This style of parenting seems to emphasize improving ability through sheer hard work. It'll work, but even so, you won't manage to reach the same level that a true naturally talented person can reach. And I seriously question whether someone raised like this will have the time and space to find out for themselves what their natural talent is, so they can work on that and do something they might actually manage to be the very best in.
 
Geeze, really, words fail me. If we don't allow parents to make their children dig in a mine so daddy can get his daily booze, then why do we allowed some kids to be made to grind the piano all day just so their mom can get her daily shot of feeling proud for someone else's achievements?

Nicely done. I'd never thought about it like that before.
 
not play the piano or violin.
I know a Chinese person who played the violin and the piano. Last I knew he worked at CERN.
Actually, I knew a family with a son and a daughter who were treated pretty much like this. Their father literally stood over them while they were doing their homework, pointing out their errors. The daughter hated piano and had to take it for five years. When the son got lower grades in high school than my brother, he was harrassed about it unceasingly.

The son committed suicide at age 28. The daughter, who was my best friend growing up, has not spoken to any childhood friends in years. The last time I called her, she was so full of hate and anger, I couldn't deal with her any more.

It was a tragic household.
Yeah... I've met every single stereotype you can think of in this regard. Then I knew a son of a scientist from Brookhaven National Laboratory who was so stilted that at one point my mother got really disturbed at the fact that he was so delighted that he was making birdhouses. He basically quit school to party and just crashed and burned in that regard. I also met a Chinese businessman who thought I was a shinning example for his son. Why I have no clue? I was an 17 year old engineering wannabe who while was smart wasn't exactly the brightest bulb around. That would have the honors of going to my friend who actually worked at CERN.
 
Last edited:
The sheer number of Chinese means it's basically statistically inevitable that they'll produce lots of "talented" kids. I'd like to see that they produce a greater percentage of these child prodigies than anyone else.

And I use the word "talent" here pretty loosely.

(If anyone else compares one of those supposed genius piano playing kids (who only ever plays someone else's music) to classical composers who were actually writing their own work at the same age I'm going to spew)

So Yo-Yo Ma is just another hack? Not everyone composes and how is that the sole measure of musical "genius" anyhow? I admire people who have ideas and compose and share their music with the world but some (many?) of them are/were not great performers and need others to interpret and bring to life their vision. Often times, a great performer will show the composer whole new facets of their work they did not see before. I fail to see how composition is the ultimate qualifier of musical genius. This sort of simplifying of musical thought is reductivist and insulting.
 
They ARE innovating. They're the world leaders in innovation in industrial espionage. No one can steal your data quicker.

My wife used to work for a big tech company.

When Chinese suppliers were visiting, they had a staff member assigned to literally stand next to them the whole day and keep them away from computers and file folders.

(Some of the products had military uses)
 
"get any grade less than an A"

So if the child simply doesn't have the innate talent to succeed at an "A" level on that course, then what?!
 
"get any grade less than an A"

So if the child simply doesn't have the innate talent to succeed at an "A" level on that course, then what?!

In the modern educational system -- which could have been designed for helicopter parents, frankly -- that's not an issue. Between grade inflation, which makes a B an average or below-average grade, and the emphasis (made worse with NCLB) on testable skills, mere hard work and rote memorization will allow almost any child to get an A in almost any class.
 
That article was both horrifying and a revelation to me, and I want to explain the latter.

I am white. I was born in 1976, and grew up in a suburb of Los Angles which was middle to upper-middle-class and had a very heavy Chinese population. Most of the families had come from either Hong Kong or Taiwan, and the kids were either born here or came here when they were no more than a few years old. At my high school, for instance, the racial breakdown was approximately 25% white, 25% various stripes of Hispanic, and 50% ethnic Chinese. I even learned a small amount of Chinese (mostly curses) by osmosis.

Just about all of my friends were Chinese. But I was never allowed to go to any of their houses. It was not until near the end of high school that I found out why: My Chinese friends were not allowed to have any friends who were not Chinese, and I was a secret they needed to keep from their parents. My Chinese friends told me that their parents were very prejudiced against anyone who was not Chinese. Non-Chinese were considered inferior, and contact between their kids and a white student such as myself would supposedly drag down their kids, and make them "common."

Anyway, the Chinese kids were very driven academically. During elementary and junior high school (for non-US readers, that's between the ages of about 5 to 13), they would attend special Chinese schools during the hours that they were not at the regular school that I attended with them. These Chinese schools would typically start when the regular school day ended, and sometimes go far into the night, as well as all day Saturday and Sunday.

At our high school, there were three types of classes in each subject: The regular class, the "dummy" class, and the advanced placement class. The Chinese kids and I took all advanced placement classes. At the beginning, there were several other white kids in those classes, and a few Hispanic kids. By the end of the first year, however, these others had fallen by the wayside, leaving only me and all the Chinese kids. I guess I had a small dose of what I now realize they were experiencing at home daily: My mother (Jewish mother stereotype) pushed me very hard academically. So I, and all of the other kids in these AP classes invariably got all A's.

Here's the mystery, which has bothered me for years, and which this article finally explained to me:

Our high school had a grade point average system whereby an A in one of the regular classes (or a "dummy" class) would count as a 4.0 towards the GPA. An A in an AP class, on the other hand, would count as a 5.0. As a result, at the end of senior year, there were 31 people (me and 30 Chinese) who had all attained an identical, highest GPA. I think it was something like 4.68. The school was at a loss. Who would they choose as valedictorian? Finally, it was decided that there would simply be 31 valedictorians. I was cool with that. I mean, who cares, right?

Massive uproar from the 30 Chinese students. This will not stand! They actually drafted a petition, which they asked me to sign. I read it carefully. It first said that having more than one valedictorian was unacceptable. It went on to say that if there was no way of distinguishing between the 31 of us, the school administration should actually choose one of us at random, and make that person the sole valedictorian. Kinda strange so far, but here's where it gets really weird: Their final point was that this whole random arrangement should be forever kept secret. No one should ever know (especially parents) that there had ever been more than one valedictorian.

I thought this whole thing was stupid and didn't sign the letter. Everyone else did, however, and so the admin went along with it. Some kid (not me) was randomly chosen as valedictorian, and we all graduated and went on our merry way.

For years, I have always wondered why they were so adamant that there be just one valedictorian, to the point of using an arbitrary and meaningless random procedure (I think they used D&D dice) to ensure the point. No one would ever explain it to me. Now I know. From the OP article:

Here are some things my daughters, Sophia and Louisa, were never allowed to do:

...

• not be the No. 1 student in every subject except gym and drama

The number one student. If you're not the valedictorian, you're not the number one student, and must therefore be punished. Furthermore, if you are one of many valedictorians, you also were not the number one student. It's like that David Merrick quote: “It is not enough for me to win. My enemies must lose.”

If there are 31 valedictorians, each and every one of them (except me, I suppose) would be punished for not "beating" the 30 others, just the same as if they had not been any sort of valedictorian at all. If only one person is to be randomly chosen as the "one true valedictorian", then at least each of them has a 1 in 31 chance of not being punished, which is better than nothing. This also explains the bizarre point about keeping this whole random thing secret: No one can every know that you have suffered the shame of tying 30 others to be "best."

In addition to explaining this life-long mystery, this article fills me with sorrow. It makes me understand the misery my friends must have been suffering in the homelife I was never permitted to see.
 
That article was both horrifying and a revelation to me, and I want to explain the latter.

-snip-

In addition to explaining this life-long mystery, this article fills me with sorrow. It makes me understand the misery my friends must have been suffering in the homelife I was never permitted to see.

What an absolutely fascinating post! Thanks for posting that.

(I was going to put an emoticon here, but quite frankly, have no idea which one is appropriate!)
 
My roommate in college had a Chinese girlfriend (now his wife of over 20 years). She practically lived with us, and so I got to know her very well. Her sister came to the same college, and was around often.

They were raised much the same way. The roommate's gf pretty much took to it, espousing the same values and outlook, tripled majored (math, EE, and comp sci), and actually strived to graduate early, because she wanted to get out into the "real" world, make money, etc. She was the kind of personality that chafed at being forced to read fiction because it was just a made up story, and wasn't going to make her money, so what was the point. I say that because I view that as her personality, not as a result of how she raised. She was just lucky that her personality fit in very well with how she was raised, so far as I can determine it. (it was a topic we talked a lot about - Chinese vs American, etc., probably mostly because she was a mother hen that spent a lot of time chastising the 'boys' for various laziness or wastes of time :) ).

Her sister wanted to be a dancer. Oh my.

You can imagine the hell her life was. I forget her major, chosen for her, of course, but it was a hard science. She was apt enough at it, but completely miserable.

There are always going to be kids that take to that kind of upbringing, but that they do is not evidence that the upbringing is not damaging.
 
It's an extremely controlling position. I wonder how she has the time to enforce all those rules. She must not have a full time job, unless you consider policing your child to be a 24/7 task until they graduate from Harvard Business School or the equivalent.
It was not my way at all.
 
Last edited:
I think that's its a recipe for disaster, or at least a recipe for very, very unintended consequences.

Wasn't there a thread here on JREF Forum about white and black students (both are anglosaxons, just ask Gunnar Myrdal ;)) complaining about how the asians had too good grades because they didn't participate in the extracurricular activities, but studied?

But let's for the sake of the discussion say that asians are immune to the law of diminishing returns. If they just eat and sleep right, they can pretty much do anything. But even if they studied for 60- or 80-hrs a week they still wouldn't rise to the top. Why?

Because if you want to be The Expert, you should devote all your efforts to that. But The Expert is always overrated, often replacable and always suspectible to changes in technology.

But if you want to rise to the top, just being good at one subject won't cut it. You need to know how organizations work, maybe some history of technology and definitley done some networking at the extracurricular activities and the student pubs.

So a person who's expert at landing gears and nothing else is hireable. But a person that has a good general knowledge of airplanes, has a private pilot license and partaked in some extracurricular activities belonges definitley in management.

And why the fixation on violin and piano? True, the piano is a good general instrument. But how would she react if one of her kids brought home a Minimoog? Or if a non-chinese plays the guzheng? :cool:

Interesting post, Vorticity. What does your chinese schoolmates do for a living? Have they risen to management?

And this is interesting: The 6 Worst Parts of Being Chinese (Not In The Stereotypes)
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom