An analysis and reading of: “Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior” . An article written by the 48 old ages old Amy L. Chua ( or ??? in Chinese ) who was born in Champaign. Illinois. Her parents were Chinese Filipinos and that’s where she got her rearing manner from.
To get down of with. Amy Chua asks the inquiry that has crossed most people’s heads: “ How make they make it? How does the Chinese parents produce all these “math wizzes” and “music prodigies” ? Amy makes it clear that the Asiatic childs are non born smart ( For the most portion. at least ) It is difficult work and preparation from the parents that shapes the kids into these wonder childs. To turn out her point she lists up a figure of things that her girl were ne’er allowed to make. such as: * Have a drama day of the month
* Watch telecasting or play computing machine games
* Attend a school drama
* Complain about non in a school drama
And so on. .
Prohibitions that seems wholly unreasonable for us “westerns” . as she slackly has named us. Throughout the text she covers several positions on parenting. which of a few I surprisingly agree on. Most of her point of views I deeply disagree with though and is far from my thought about proper parenting. Each clip she lists up one of her positions. she compares the Chinese position with the Western position. She does this in a really subjective mode I think. She is really cagey rhetorically. At some parts of the text. I really caught my ego being really near to acquiring dragged towards her side. I found it rather diverting to experience the power of poignancy. but at the same clip a spot dashing.
Harmonizing to Amy. the chief difference between Chinese parents and Western parents is the manner they see their kids. Western parents believe that esteeming their children’s picks. their individualism and ever promoting them to prosecute their true passions is the manner. In contrast. Chinese parents believe that fixing their kids for the hereafter. and demoing them what they are capable of. in the signifier of hours of repeat and really high outlooks. is the manner for their kids to acquire a good life. Which in common Chinese sense means a good occupation. so the boy/girl can take attention of their parent when they grow old.
Even though Amy admits that her rearing methods may be tough at first. she insists that it will all pay off in the terminal. but is that wholly true? The reply to that is by and large no. Of class there are some kids who can manage all the force per unit area and failure. and will turn up to be highly successful and confident. but the bulk can’t. In fact China is nr. 6 on the “Wikipedia list of states by self-destruction rate” Which means that per. 100. 000 people in China 22. 23 people commit self-destruction. Compared to Denmark ( Nr. 36 ) . where the figure is well lower at 11. 9 and where the Western parenting manner is the dominant. A happenstance? I do non believe so. As Amy points out in her article. she does non believe in individualism and I am certain that Amy is non the lone 1 who feels that manner. There are several surveies demoing that non everyone handles stress identically and that is displayed in this statistic.
As I stated earlier I agree on a few on her point of views. An illustration could be that “What parents understand is that nil is fun until you’re good at it” I agree on this every bit good as “there’s nil better for constructing assurance than larning you can make something you thought you couldn’t” I agree on these two quotation marks. but still think that her general parenting manner is excessively rigorous. There is specifically one thing that she is taking off from her kids that I do non acquire. The societal facet of a childhood. No uncertainty that utilizing Amy’s techniques will take to some academically strong kids. but they will stop up holding a low societal capital. and a large deficiency in societal accomplishments.
Not being functional socially could stop up bing them large occupation chances. because their deficiency of societal functionality could strike them down. when for case traveling to a occupation interview. So in the terminal the kids might stop up non acquiring a good occupation. because their parents took away their opportunity for developing some societal accomplishments. By that they won’t be able to take attention of their parent. because they won’t be able to gain adequate money. Which would intend that all those hours at place. practicing and repetition. is traveling to stop up being otiose clip. because the child can’t take those abilities out in existent life.
By taking away their freedom and infinite for creativeness you are fundamentally turning your kids into small machines. They will acquire highly good at making what they are told. but once they are asked to work something out for themselves. for case bring forthing a design for something. they will hold no hint what to make.
I am non a fan of Amy L. Chua’s methods but I do believe that us ‘westerns’ could take little things from her and use to our parenting. But every bit good as we can larn from her. she can decidedly besides learn from us.
I want to complete my essay of with a quotation mark I feel reflects my position on rearing really good. As Anne Frank one time said:
“Parents can merely give good advice or set them on the right waies. but the concluding forming of a person’s character prevarications in their ain custodies. ”