<p>Self-proclaimed “Tiger Mom” Amy Chua arguing Chinese women are superior mothers! She has more opinions about superior races-The “Tiger Mom” has written a new book !</p>
<p>While we can debate the reasons, it is a FACT that some demographic groups have attained, on average, significantly greater socio-economic achievement.</p>
<p>Who cares?</p>
<p>^^^^^This.</p>
<p>Oh firstgenbsp112 ? point made?</p>
<p>In the end, we are not defined by our race but by ourselves. If one is Asian it does not mean they’re smart. If one is black its does not mean they’re athletic or poor. You could be Asian but you may not be in the Upper Class. When people stereotype, how do you think the ‘outlier’ feels? Its shameful that people succumb to their stereotypes and listen to what other people put inside their heads. You should never reference your stereotype and try to fulfill this stereotype. You are who you are and stereotypes basically say everyone of a certain racial group is the same. Even if some demographics are in higher socioeconomic classes, it does not mean that everyone in that class is in that socioeconomic class.</p>
<p>I thought her/the message was,… the culture demands the excellence.</p>
<p>Her younger daughter’s applying to college this year. Time for another book.</p>
<p>I can’t discuss the book until I’ve read it. I’m the second on the library’s waiting list for a copy, following our family’s rule of not giving any money to the Chua-Rubenfeld clan.</p>
<p>There is a lot to be said for a culture - ethnic, religious, national, within a particular family, or whatever - that emphasizes education. I don’t think the value judgment can be taken any further than that.</p>
<p>I’ll be game to discuss it, after I’ve read it. That means mid-February or so. </p>
<p>To discuss it before only means airing whatever biases or insecurities we all have about parenting and racial differences. </p>
<p>I am not convinced that two law professors in New Haven are the right people to write a dispassionate study of cultural issues. I might have felt differently were they not praising their own culture/parenting/outlook on life.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I like it… a neat idea.</p>
<p>I prefer not to even give them the time of day. I’ll pass on this and all their books. The very premise is offensive to me.</p>
<p>I don’t know…I read the first book and it wasn’t any better or worse than most parenting books I’ve read. At least she’s honest, personal, and self-deprecating, which is more than I can say for most parenting gurus who make a parent feel that not adopting the guru’s particular blend of parenting tips will lead inevitable to one’s child sitting 20 years later in the boxers in the parent’s basement playing endless games of World of Warcraft, stubbed out joints scattered on the floor around his seat.</p>
<p>[Tiger</a> Mom’s New Book Stirs Up Culture Wars](<a href=“Tiger Mom's New Book Stirs Up Culture Wars”>Tiger Mom's New Book Stirs Up Culture Wars)</p>
<p>Do you guys remember, Amy Chua, the “Tiger Mom,” whose book a few years ago caused a big stir and debate over parenting and academic/career/life success? </p>
<p>She’s released a new controversial book (linked above). Might be an interesting conversation starter here. :)</p>
<p>Here was the first paragraph from the article: </p>
<p>** Remember “Tiger Mom,” the Yale professor who brought us the most buzzy and controversial child rearing philosophy since helicoptering and attachment parenting? Well now the ire-raising author of “The Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,” Amy Chua, who argued that strict, Chinese moms are best, is back—and on her way to raising even more hackles this time around. Her latest book, “The Triple Package,” deems eight cultural groups in America as being superior to others. And, though the book is not due out until February, Twitter criticisms are already flying, with many calling Chua “racist” and a self-promoter. **</p>
<p>Amy Chua’s ideas are a bit extreme, but she made some good points in her last book, and I agreed with some of them (caveat: I’m not a parent and have never raised children).
This one seems just as thought provoking. :)</p>
<p>Cultural superiority is a bad term. But saying that some cultures are more successful at certain things (rather than implying that they are just plain better overall) makes sense.</p>
<p>
I think this is something Americans need to realize. You can’t say that generalizations are always bad or wrong.</p>
<p>Many of the groups in question are relatively recent (within a few generations) immigrant groups from overseas countries. Immigration itself has the effect of screening for the most motivated people in the source population (both in the willingness to move to far away country, and the screening effect of the immigration system – e.g. visas for PhD students and highly skilled workers and their families).</p>
<p>Is it that surprising that the children of highly motivated PhD holders and highly skilled workers are more likely to be encouraged and supported to high achievement at home?</p>
<p>I might develop a newfound dosis of respect for Chua. While I have little doubt that reading the book will be a torturous exercise that will result in feeling sorry for the people cut from the same abject cloth (the lethal combination of high intellect and social cluelessness) … she has the merit of reaching a conclusion that has been known for a long time, but rarely dared to be spoken in clear terms:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Indeed the process of climbing a ladder for selfish and individual benefits but also kicking it away to preclude others from obtaining the same results exemplifies the subgroup that only believes in the value of sharing the wealth with the ever important self and, perhaps, a few very close relatives, and do the utmost to deprive others along the way. Pathologic is indeed the correct appraisal of this gangrenous behavior. </p>
<p>And that is why, despite all the accomplishments, be it academic, social, and financial, the biggest void will remain the total absence of earning any form of … respect from the rest of us. </p>
<p>Got to feel sorry for Amy! And, yes, I was sarcastic about finding a way to, somehow, respect her. Not gonna happen with this third leg of a nauseating trilogy that started with the moronic “World on Fire!”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think that is at all what is meant by kicking the ladder away.</p>
<p>I took it as you use the tool to get somewhere, then recognizing that it has constraints and a downside (e.g. excessively hard work for instance) you kick those tools away since at that point there is more downside that upside to that ladder. That is “breaking free from constraints”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Meh. I have seen a lot of people who fit the characteristic profiles and they are by far the exact opposite. They volunteer a lot, they build ladders for others, donate a lot and they are role models for hard work and generosity in their community. The people who do their utmost to deprive others are the outliers.</p>
<p>I’ll wait until the book comes out, but it just seems like a variation on the old idea that hungry ambitious immigrant groups are assimilated by the third or fourth generation into lazy entitled generic-Americans.</p>