Osvelia Arevalo
English 1A
Professor Cummins
March 11 2016
Controversy in Parenting Styles
Amy Chua writes: “Dog raising is easy. It requires patience, love, and possibly an initial investment for training time. By contrast, Chinese parenting is one of the most difficult things I can think of. You have to be hated sometimes by someone you love and who hopefully loves you, and there’s just no letting up, no point at which it suddenly becomes easy…You have to be able to swallow pride and change tactics at any moment” (Chua 161).
The debate in parenting styles broke out in 2011, right after Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother was published. Many people around the world reacted with harsh criticism and judgment. The book was controversial because it communicated that Chinese parents have better parenting styles than Western parents. First, Wall Street Journal excerpt was published addressing thoughts of Battle Hymn that led to hundreds of furious emails sent every hour to the author. Not to mention, the author was then invited to the Today Show where she was interviewed in front of two million and was attacked and humiliated by the hosts. Individuals yelled put “She’s a monster” or “The way she raised her kids is outrageous” (Chua 231). Many countries had different reactions to the book. The United Kingdom understood the irony of the book, Japan was sympathetic, and the United States had remarkably different reactions from groups of people. Some individuals expressed contempt to Chua’s harsh parenting style. The author was criticized with such loathe through email, phone calls, Facebook posts, and interviews (Chua 235). This debate is particularly important because it raised the questions how parents should raise kids and which method is the best.
In Amy Chua’s book, The Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, Chua gave an insight of her Chinese parenting with her two daughters. Amy Chua is an American lawyer, writer, and legal scholar. Chua is currently a professor of law at Yale Law School. She raised her two daughters using the Chinese parenting style. As a result, her daughters are now two successful individuals, one attending Harvard and the other Yale. As mentioned above, many individuals criticized Chua’s parenting style that resulted in countless articles being published to counter argue Chua’s beliefs. An opposing position, Sun Yunxiao, a deputy director of the China Youth and Children Research Center, wrote “Tiger Moms Raise Broken Cubs” in the Beijing Review that challenged Chua’s parenting. In addition, David Brooks, an American conservative political and cultural commentator for New York Times, wrote “Amy Chua is a Wimp” that opposed Chua’s belief. Yunxiao disagrees with the act of Chua ruling everything for her children while Brooks argues that Chua is coddling her children by not letting them develop cognitive skills. Yunxiao finds common ground by agreeing that children need authority and parents need to say no to their children; Brooks agrees with Chua that parents should push and demand children.
Yunxiao argues that Chua is wrong for choosing everything for her children and for having the absolute authority. He believes that parents should not choose extracurricular activities. Also, he argues that Chinese parents pressure children to choose a career they want. For example, a survey led by the China Youth and Child Research found that 54.7% of parents hope their children their doctorate and 83.6% require them to score in the top 15 in class (Yunxiao). On the other hand, Chua believes that “Chinese parents believe that they know what is best for their children and, therefore, override all of their children’s own desires and preferences” (Chua 53). Chua wrote in her book that she made her daughter, Sophia, practice at least 90 minutes everyday including weekends and made her memorize everything even if it wasn’t required. Sophia was forced to play the piano at the young age; Chua would threaten her that she would take all her stuffed animals and burn them if she did not follow orders (Chua 28). Yunxiao blames Chinese education system and Chinese tradition for child rearing because parents rule everything for their children. He communicates that ruling everything for a child causes harm to the development of children. He mentions that China had to make a law because Chinese parenting was out of control. In 1990, the law of the People’s Republic of China on Protection Minors protected children’s rights to live, development, protection, and participation (Yunxiao). He supports his argument by claiming that “children cannot all reach the first class level; they should enjoy the right choose their activities in which to participate.” On the other, Chua states that many Asian kids who were oppressively raised by strict parents are unbelievingly grateful for making them do demanding things. Similarly, she argues that by demanding and ruling children creates confidence and development. She believes that Chinese parents prepare their children by teaching them what they are capable of, giving them skills, working habits, and inner confidence that no one can take away (Chua 63). Chua states that her daughter Sophia performed at Carnegie Hall, a very prestigious hall that only the best musicians perform (Chua 136). Yet, Yunxiao includes international research that revealed that democratic is the best home education while absolute authority is the second worst and least successful. Yunxiao says that “Kids grow up in the company of their friends of the same age and they grow through their own experience. Many Chinese families care only care about studying, which leaves the children alone emotionally and mental development is often ignored.” Throughout, Battle of the Hymn, Chua is an absolute control of her daughters’ life by making them play the piano and violin at a young age. Chua made them practice for hours with no breaks, and the end result was two successful musicians. Having absolute authority results in different endings, but evidently changes the child’s future one way or another.
David Brooks argues that Chua is coddling her children because she makes her daughters do the most demanding tasks, but fails to teach them cognitive skills. Brooks says “practicing a piece of music for hours requires a lot of commitment, but is nowhere near as demanding as a sleepover with girls.” He reasons this by arguing that “managing status rivalries, negotiating group dynamics, understanding social norms, navigating the distinction between self and group impose cognitive demands that blow away any intense tutoring session.” Chua articulates from the start that her daughters were never allowed to attend sleepovers, have a playdate, be in a school play, watch TV or play computer games, choose their own extracurricular activities, get any grade less than an A, not be the #1 student in every subject except for gym and drama, play any instrument other than piano or violin (Chua 3). Chua believed by implementing these rules her children will be successful. She says that she did not want to follow the cliché sayings that “Children need to explore or they need to make their own mistakes” (Chua 69). For example, one time she allowed her daughter Sophia to a sleepover due to peer pressure. As a result, Sophia came back exhausted and unable to play piano (Chua 68). Also, Chua learned that in sleepover A, B, and C had excluded D; B had gossiped viciously about E when she was in another room (Chua 69). Chua learned that she did not want her daughter to be exposed to the worst of Western society. In contrast, Brooks believed that children need to learn how to manage people, detect shortcomings, and interact with diverse people. In a research conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon, found that members with high collective intelligence were good at reading each others emotions and detecting each others inclinations and strengths (Brooks). He claims that Chua shelters her children by making them play an instrument and having them study hard. He feels that in childhood, mastering cognitive skills is essential for achievement; however, Chua sees childhood as a training period, a time to build character and invest in the future (Chua 97). Brooks communicates that “individuals need to have the ability to trust people outside kinship circle, read intonation and moods, and understand how the psychological pieces”. In short, Chua and Brooks don’t agree in the skills that are essential for achievement.
Yun Xiao and Chua may disagree in parenting styles and how it affects a child’s future, but they have common ground of what a parent should do. Although Chua and Yunxiao agree that parents need some type of authority, they don’t agree on the level of authority a parent should have in a child’s life. Yunxiao coincides implicitly that by having some type of authority a child’s future will be better and prosperous. He states “One thing to ponder is parents should learn how to say “no” to their kids. Children need authority from parents, who are supposed to be there beacon.” Chua takes authority a bit too far, but in the end, both authors find common ground. David Brooks and Amy Chua agree that children need to be pushed and demanded. On the contrary, Brooks wishes that Chua wasn’t “so soft and indulgent” with her daughters because he believes getting out of comfort zones is essential than just demanding tasks. He wishes that Chua would recognize that “in some ways the school cafeteria is more intellectually demanding than the library” (Brooks). Throughout Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, it is evident that Chua pushes her daughters to the extreme by making them play the piano and the violin, choosing their extracurricular activities, and expecting them to be on top of their academics. Chua clearly states “I have a family name to uphold, aging parents to make proud. I like clear goals and clear ways of measuring success” (Chua 26). Brooks and Chua both understand that in order for a child to be successful, they have to be pushed and demanded constantly. Although they don’t agree on the foundations and skills to achieve success, they both find common ground that children need to be pressured and challenged to arduous tasks. Both adults have different game plans for triumph, but they both want to score.
Chua’s Chinese parenting style opposes many beliefs and causes judgments. After Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother was published many arguments and oppositions occurred. The most important points brought out are the way that Chua had absolute authority and the way that she defined success. Many oppose her beliefs and the way she implemented Chinese style “loosely” in America. In the end, many found common ground by understanding that children do need some type of authority and that success is what many aspire for their children. This debate can go on forever because there are so many oppositions that are against Chua parenting style. The debate raises the question of which route a parent should take. Due to this debate, many profound feelings and thoughts can happen in making the arduous decision in how to raise a successful child without being that “tiger parent”.
Work Cited
Brooks, David. "Amy Chua Is a Wimp." New York Times 18 Jan. 2011: 25.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.
Chua, Amy. Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother. New York: Penguin, 2011. Print.
Yunxiao, Sun. "Tiger Moms Raise Broken Cubs." Beijing Review 54.8 (2011): 21.
Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.