Amy Chua's Critique on The Parenting Styles of Westerners Compared to Chinese Parents

Critiques from Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother

Amy Chua a pedagogia at Yale Edifier opined that “Chinese” mother’s otherwise kenned as non-westernized parents, parenting styles are more efficient than westernized parents. Chua comes to this conclusion through firsthand experience growing up in a Chinese household and while raising her own kids. Chua sets mainly her Chinese background as being the non-western culture that gives their children “work habits and inner confidence that no one can ever take away”. (Chua 305) Chua is very prideful and confident when she makes that verbalization because its conspicuous she carries that pride and confidence on her that she gained from her parenting styles because she is a Edifier at Yale Law School.

Chua claims that a plethora of people question how Chinese parents raises the stereotypical prosperous kid. Chua stresses that when parents wonder what these parents do to engender so many math wizzes and music prodigies, she even brings the “success” of her daughter into play. Chua exercises on that fact “When she performed “The Little White Donkey” …. parents came up to me and verbally expressed “What an impeccable piece for – it’s spunk and so her”. (309) Querying of this comes to play on how does playing one piece deem you a musical prodigy wouldn’t the parents who made the comment view of her as a musical genius like Mozart or Beethoven.

Chua argues that there has been studies and not only the cultural stereotypes about quantifiable between Chinese and western parenting styles. One of studies concludes that “70% of the western mothers verbalized either that stressing academic prosperity is not good for children …”(Chua 305) but this verbal expression is contradict when she verbalizes that if the child peregrinates home with a B on a test some parents will sit their children down and express deprecation. Chua is forgetting to recollect that one study doesn’t generalize that western parents don’t stress academic prosperity.

Chua perpetually expounds the different parenting styles of Chinese parents versus western parents. Chines parents can’t stress enough practice, practice and more practice and contemptible comments. Chinese parents visually perceive it as a way of motivation like making a comment of calling their own daughter Chua garbage. Chinese parent cerebrate its way incentivizing their kids to better themselves well Chua when she was irreverent to her mother, it’s in some way positive penalization so they won’t perpetuate their “garbage” ways of being impudent to their parents.

Chua states three immensely colossal difference of Chinese versus western parental mindsets. The first difference is that she descries that Western parents are solicitous about their child’s self-esteem because they worry about how they feel but Chinese parents aren’t concerned about that, their only concerned about how much vigor their child holds. Chua explicates what transpires when it comes down to grades “if a child peregrinates home with an A-Minus, a western parent will most likely accolade the child” (307) and “the Chinese mother will gasp in horror”(307) It’s intriguing how Chua kens how a Western household works without experiencing one first hand but still opines with this much confidence.

The second astronomically immense ole magnificent difference is erroneous but Chinese parents believe that their kids owe them everything. The second reason for this little obscure for this is a little obscure, but it’s a little obscure, but it’s probably a cumulation of Confucian filial piety... (Chua 307). It’s pellucidly erroneous because there is no correlation in that reverence and owing parents everything. As a Yale law school edifier wouldn’t Chua possess the ken erudition of the conceptions of filial piety Chinese conception of deference for elder’s parents and antecedents; you would cerebrate because she was raised in a stringent, rigid style home her Chinese mother would enforce this conception by Confucius for her to be conscious of his conceptions and because she’s Chinese.

The third and last difference is that Chinese parents believe that they ken what is best for their children and ergo override all of their children’s own desires and predilections. (Chua 307). Chua goes on perpetually about examples of what their children can’t do relish Chinese girls can’t have boyfriends or be a component of school plays. Throughout reading the story and plenarily understand you could visually perceive patterns of what the non-western parents like. The non-western parent analyzing Chua’s perspective, enjoins their children from being homogeneous to a western child.

Determinately, Chua expounds the Chinese style of coercion, about her daughter Lulu who was 7, and when she was working on incredibly arduous a piece on the piano called “The Little White Donkey” by some French composer, the designation of the composer is included in her summary but here comes the exhilarating part.

“What Chinese parent understand is that nothing is frolicsome until you’re proficient at it. To get proficiently adept at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their predilections; things are always hardest at the commencement...” (Chua 306) Chua foreshadows that this parenting tactic will be the root of prosperity from parenting like a Chinese mother. Chua includes her daughter Lulu tore the score the little white donkey by that French dude to shreds and how her mom threatened her by saying she will take away lunch, dinner, Christmas and even Chanukah. “Lulu realized it the same time I did. I held my breath. She endeavored it tentatively again. Then she played it more confidently and faster…” Mommy, look---it’s easy”(Chua 309). Chua conspicuously shows that nothing is frolicsome until you’re proficient at it through her daughter Lulu. The quote is like a gold miner finding the gold in the mine or in the little pan. Chua represents the goldminer finding impertinent treasure like dirt or little rocks she determinately makes evident the prosperity of her parenting style of coercion.

Chua’s argument that non-western parenting styles are more efficient than western styles is not in the construal of what others would visually perceive as efficient. The evidence that Chua exhibits of prosperity is not plenarily acceptable to the definition of prosperity of the stereotypical Chinese child. The validity of her works is not plenarily exhibited because she doesn’t show the reader a stereotypical child but rather a stereotypical Chinese mother and there parenting skills. A law edifier at Yale doesn’t indispensably betoken that you will get the job done of your piece of work but it does lay out that she endeavored and that’s what counts right. Chua exhibited difference s of western and non-western parents but still generalized, what could you verbally express she’s inditing from her own perspective and about her own culture versus another.