I don’t think she’s trying to stir up controversy, I think she’s trying to express a minority opinion. And when you have a minority opinion, at one point you simply cease to care whether or not you’re offending anyone, and just speak your mind, hoping that at least some people will think about and discuss what you’ve said, even if they disagree.</p>
<p>
People become hostile to Asian Americans as a group because of her book, and she’s at fault? If someone becomes racist or discriminatory towards a group because they assume every East Asian American is Amy Chua then it is their crime.</p>
<p>I thought it idiotic that she was promoting a formula to raise super-achievers, as if there aren’t many routes to such a thing. Now she is making ridiculous generalizations about entire ethnic groups. Such an “intellectual” is not worth our consideration.</p>
<p>You could wait until you have a chance to read it, before dismissing everything as ridiculous. Factually, some immigrant groups are more successful on average than others. Investigating why seems like a normal and worthwhile social sciences project.</p>
<p>I don’t need to buy a book to understand that immigrant strivers are often financially successful because they deny themselves and work hard, and demand the same from their children. As members of one such group might say, “This is news?”</p>
<p>I would also add that I don’t consider unhappy people to be successful, no matter how rich or famous they may be.</p>
<p>I know the Nigerians are one of the most successful minority groups, because they have so much money that they are constantly offering large sums of it to me if I do something relatively simple like just give them my bank account information. Go Nigerians!!</p>
<p>How about deliberately antagonizing others with a vengeance? </p>
<p>For the record, elevating what is a glorified oped derived from a set of questionable opinions to scholarly work is an insult to all people who produce scholarly research. It does not matter if the subject is worthy of a study or research, the tenet is that the researcher should not start with a vested opinion and simply weaves a web of support through “startling” statistics. This is exactly what she did in her previous “research” and what has been reported so far by people who had the chance to read the book before its release. </p>
<p>Our resident critic who remains predictably quick in denouncing racism (but slow in recognizing that undue claims of superiority are cut from the same cloth) does have a point about the need to withhold personal criticisms until after read the book. Of course, one could use the press releases by the author as a reasonable guide to what to expect. </p>
<p>In the end, the result is as predictable as the usual whining by some. The book will please some, annoy others, and leave most in blissful indifference. The pleased people will never concede that the book is pure garbage. And the annoyed will never concede that beyond oodles of non-sense, there might be some valid arguments that could have been developed by a competent researcher and author. But then, if Malcom G gets away with it, why would Chua not. All that is needed is feeding a few pounds of red meat to the rabid! </p>
<p>And, NOTHING will change and NOTHING positive will emerge from Chua’s prose. Safe and except the expected profits to the publisher and this sad person who continues to earn ridicule with each stroke of her keyboard.</p>
<p>But, I haven’t read the book yet, so I will reserve judgement until I read it. Then I will figure out if their goal is to deliberately antagonize people or if they are trying to make a point that they believe in and is backed up by some data or insight.</p>
<p>Nice try! Aren’t you the one here who is bringing up the claims of racism and, now also one of possible misogyny? </p>
<p>The issue if not that Chua is Asian and married to a Jew and that they co-authored the book. The criticism is about the author qualities, literary contributions, and positions. She is criticized for what she writes, advocates, and stands for. Not for her race and sex. </p>
<p>Do you feel that she should remain immune to criticism because of her race and sex? And that any criticisms are obviously and solely tinted by racism or sexism? </p>
<p>By the way, do not bother answering those questions as they are purely rhetorical. Your positions and predictable interventions are sufficiently clear.</p>
<p>Whenever there is a thread that offers an opportunity for anti-Asian bashing, we can be assured Xiggi will chime in. Not one of us agrees fully with Amy Chua’s position in her last book but your increasing and excessive vitriol towards the author of one book borders on pathologic.</p>
<p>Yes, I am witch hunting. He wasn’t involved in her first two books. She is race baiting, or otherwise American bashing, or just plain flinging mud in all directions as quickly as possible to generate enough controversy and money and college acceptances for her younger daughter. The hubby is window dressing, and I find it a bit embarrassing that at this late date she is apparently worried enough about appearances to want a human shield by her side.</p>
<p>You can give your crusade a rest. Again, you are the only one who is making this an Anti_Asian or a racist issue. </p>
<p>I did, however, use the term pathological behavior upthread. Thank you for offering a cheap confirmation. </p>
<p>If you do not like the vitriol, either ignore it or address it with a bit more context than your usual hollow whining and gross generalizations without substance.</p>
<p>It is not silly to find disturbing the mention of certain races or ethnic groups as superior or inferior to others. Whether you read 5 sentences about it in a sneak peek such as we’ve been given, or the whole book, human history has enough tragic examples of what this kind of thinking can lead to in extreme cases to give any fair-minded person a reason to worry.</p>
<p>The problem is that people don’t understand what they read when they read those 5 sentences.</p>
<p>And then the vitriol and hateful comments stems from that…</p>
<p>From the description by Penguin:
</p>
<p>The point is that the book claims that those groups believe in their superiority, they are NOT claiming that they are.
Think of it as a manifest destiny attitude. </p>
<p>Now, I haven’t read the book, so there may be another claim in there, but there is no such claim in the 5 sentences that a person would read about the book…unless of course they didn’t understand it.</p>