Wait just a durn second here. Aren’t you defending a mother who’s ridiculing her daughter for not being perfect?
I guess your concept of “A bit of compulsion” vastly differs from mine. I am not against discipline, and guidance. But I am also not for the abuse of that power.
And I think your confidence that I am wrong is misplaced. You cannot be sure that this is not the case. It’s obvious here that the mother is abusing her love.
yes yes we can both go find “one girl” who did something that would agree to our arguments, or just make something up. Lets avoid pointless anecdotal stories, and instead focus on the story at hand.
Lol well I would disagree with you. That’s all I’m doing- I know you believe what you believe and I wasn’t trying to persuade you. Just giving you a different opinion.
Right. I don’t disagree. I just think that its possible to learn the value of hard work in more ways than one.
I didn’t say you should be shamed into submission or some silly thing like that. I don’t mind hearing your views. I just like to tell you what I think about them.
Ehh its not about shutting you up. I just have a smartass way of talking sometimes. I really am interested in what you have to say. But my point was that you’re assuming there could be psychological damage and I have no idea why. The only thing I can guess is that you would equate the feelings you’d go through in a certain situation to be the same for someone else. So…why are you making that assumption? And if you’re not then please clarify.
Well you lose that bet- different people come to maturity at different ages. I can’t assign some arbitrary number to it. But what I do think is that their mother knows better what they’re capable of and maybe what they might regress into if they’re not given strict discipline. Perhaps that’s a possibility, that without their mother hovering around they would be wild child’s. Maybe that’s not the case, but I rather assume the mother is more aware of the situation than I am or anyone else.
Through experience? She’s definitely spent a lot of time with her daughter so I think she knows if her daughter is able to handle a certain musical piece or not.
Well what’s wrong with it?
This world is full of surprises
If you’re able to find a way to live without any financial support from your parents- then you can handle yourself. Because there’s nothing a parent can do to stop you when you’re at that point really.
That’s exactly it. I think child labor laws and mandatory school attendance are complete nonsense. If you want to leave your house and live on your own then you have every right. But if you want to live in your parents house then you follow their rules, that’s all.
I’d have a problem with it because you’re raising them to harm other people. So yes parents can tell their children what to do, with sane limits of course. I think those limits are pretty obvious myself. Raising childen to hurt, steal, kill = bad.
I’d say if you don’t let someone sleep when they’re sleepy that’s sleep deprivation. But you don’t know if she was sleep deprived at all so why bring it up?
It means I think you’re too sensitive. You bring up stockholm syndrome when I say there are people who wish to take care of their parents even if their parents were strict. Why assume everyone’s emotions are crushed when their parents are harsh?
I don’t care to make you agree- you can do what you want.
She was ridiculing her daughter for being lazy. The mother sure wasn’t lazy. She didn’t go about the whole situation perfectly but immediate perfection wasn’t the point. It was about trying till you got it right.
I don’t see any abuse of power here.
I just don’t see it that way at all. Where you’re coming from it makes sense one way- but for me it makes sense the other way.
You’re right. But at the same time our arguments here stem from what I believe to be our own experiences. You make a lot of assumptions as to how the daughter might feel or from where the mother is coming from- I’m doing the same. So I thought I’d throw in some stories to help you understand why I believe the way I do. If you don’t care for that- that’s ok.
lol and I also know a lot of american students on campus who were born and raised in the United states that are retards in a different sense. They’re very social- but end up drinking too much then go off driving and dying a bit too often. Collectivizing like that is a bit pointless- everyone goes through different life experiences that shape their personality. I’d say its as foolish to point their lack of social skills with tough parents as it’d be to say that being an idiot who drinks all the time and is a physical nusiance to everyone is the result of lazy parents. There are just way too many factors that could come into play.
As far as I’m concerned disobeying the parent when you live in their house is aggression. Their house- their rules. She agreed to work on the piece and didn’t want to follow through. So she got disciplined.
I was raised to respect my parents. They weren’t abusive, but if I was acting like a jerk(Which did happen a lot at a very young age, lol I could go more into if you’re actually interested) they’d be sure to let me know they don’t tolerate that behavior. And I don’t mean that they were knocking out teeth or something crazy like that. Attempts at discipline is what it is. She wasn’t holding her down by chains what are you talking about.
No because there is an easy possibility of physical injury with waterboarding, from what I’ve read. Im sure you can find all sorts of info if you’re interested but here’s one http://www.alternet.org/world/66954 -“The media usually characterize the practice as “simulated drowning.” That’s incorrect. To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is, the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted”
“But to answer precisely your question, it is a terrible way of torturing a man, because you’re bringing—you bring him next to death and then back to life. And sometimes he doesn’t come back to life.”
I get your point- but waterboarding isn’t one of those forms of torture without chance of physical injury.
Highly coerced in what way? She didn’t hit her, she didn’t tie her up. All she said was that she’d GIVE HER TOYS away. So what? Its by the grace of her parents that she has those toys in the first place.
Doesn’t the claim that disobedience is aggression contradict the claim that parents own their children? If children aren’t self-owners, I don’t see how they can commit aggression in the first place. Do you think it’s aggression when a horse kicks its owner?
Now I’d like to attack the quoted material on its own. If disobedience is aggression, then presumably that includes a child disobeying a parent who’s ordering her to perform a sex act with him. You would seem to have no problem, then, if the parent coerces the child into performing said sex act, which is otherwise called “rape”. Thus, your position must conclude that parental rape of a child is okay, because she lives in her parents’ house and must follow their rules. (Note: any attempt to use “No parent would ever do that” as a counter-argument is invalid, because my argument is about logical implications.)
It seems I need to repeat myself: “Earning an ‘asswhupping’ for fighting back against pre-existing physical coercion is nothing short of child abuse IMHO. So I’m sorry you had abusive parents. No wonder you consider Ms. Chua to be ‘not very harsh’.”
So are you going back on your earlier words? Did you actually ever receive an “asswhupping” for disobedience or resisting parental coercion? Simply saying “they weren’t abusive” has no effect on me, as I stand by my earlier statement.
Did I say “without chance”? No, I didn’t. So again, your whole attempt at a counter-argument is actually moot. Waterboarding can leave no lasting physical injury and is considered a torture technique. Thus the going definition of “torture” doesn’t imply that a lasting physical injury must be inflicted.
She apparently dragged her daughter back to the piano. The fact that she forced her daughter to stay at the piano at all means it’s highly coerced IMO. Furthermore, there’s the interesting (at least to me) question of who owns the daughter’s toys – the daughter herself, or her parents?
If grace can be revoked after it’s been given, how can it be said that grace was ever given in the first place?
First things first, Amy Chua apparently is a horrible Chinese wife, because she doesn’t do as her husband tells her. The fact that she isn’t at home all day cooking ought to be cause for concern.
Anyway, to deal with what the OP is saying, Amy Chua most definitely is insane. She sadistically abuses her children and confuses them. As someone pointed out, her children “loving” her is nothing more than an example of the Stockholm syndrome. The parenting style that Chua advocates simply molds children into spineless, socially inept, and morally bankrupt persons. A proper parenting style molds children into responsible individuals.
Those logical implications are you thinking way too much about something no one else has to. Raping a child is obviously a terrible crime to anyone who would think once about it. Throw those out the window. If the argument is “Where do we draw the line”- then you found it that’s where we draw the line between what parents are able to do and are unable to do. Its not that difficult.
Doesn’t mater if it has no effect on you its true. You can stand by statements that satisfy your perspective all you want. Lol an asswhupping is some hyperbole they weren’t putting me in a rear naked choke. But lets say my mom asked me to give her a glass of water- I remember taking the glass and throwing it across the room so that it shattered(completely on purpose)- so she smacked me upside the head. I don’t call that abuse(not with all her might or whatever extreme)- and I think it was an appropriate response to a child acting out thinking he’s boss. Telling me “Honey please don’t do that” wouldn’t have worked in that situation. So if I were to do something even worse like punch and kick her and start ripping up things in the house- then maybe I would’ve gotten more than one smack upside the head.
What her daughter went through is not torture. Sure we can say that what constitutes torture might be subjective to everyone, but since her daughter was happy by the end of the night, as much as you want to argue with the idea- I’d say that tells me she was happy with the results- the connection you’re trying to make is just sensationalist.
It doesn’t say she dragged her daughter back to the piano- she just ordered her. Yes the parents own her toys- they gave it to her on conditions and they can take it away. They own everything in the house. She should be grateful that they feed her, clothe her, put a roof over her head, and anything else they give her. If she’s not grateful- then she doesn’t get to keep those gifts- simple as that.
All these assumptions that you know better. But you don’t. I can make extreme assumptions that “proper” parenting style(whatever that is) leads to heroin abuse and the type of individuals that shoot their parents if they’re not allowed to play halo 3.
The amount of hatred spewing out the mouth of you and the OP for people you don’t really know doesn’t show me what good this proper parenting does.
I don’t know what you’re trying to say here. Are you trying to say that I’m thinking way too much about “something no one else has to”?
No.
Now what?
That’s not my argument. My argument is about more general principles. Honestly, I don’t see how you could not see that, so I figure you’re being dishonest yet again. Please, by all means, correct me if I’m wrong.
Now explain to me what general principles you’re invoking (if any) to “draw the line” at rape and nowhere else. By the way, I guess that means murder is okay with you in this context.
Do I really have to explain to you that there is no true meaning for “abusive”? It’s a matter of opinion. And my opinion is that your parents are abusive if they give you an “asswhupping” for physically resisting their coercion.
PROTIP: Don’t use hyperbole in argumentation. It’s dishonest.
You took a glass and threw it across the room so it shattered? On purpose? What was wrong with you?
If you were punching and kicking your mother (or any other person) for no reason, then you’re an aggressor and I’d say your mother (or other person) would be justified in defending herself.
In any case, your initial description – “I would’ve gotten an asswhupping for fighting back against my parents” – now seems to have little or no standing against reality. Why would you engage in such hyperbole? Why would you be so dishonest?
For the nth time, I don’t consider the ends to have justified the means there. Which means I couldn’t care one bit whether her daughter appeared to be happy after the ordeal was over. The means used were still totally wrong IMHO. Get it yet?
Accusing me of being “sensationalist” isn’t going to change my opinion or make me shut up. At all.
I think the quote below implies that Ms. Chua physically coerced her daughter back to the piano:
As you can see, Ms. Chua tells her daughter that she can make her get back to the piano. It seems to me that she (implicitly) made good on her threat. Why would her daughter physically resist at the piano unless she had been physically forced back there and physically forced to remain there?
I think it’s debatable as to whether her parents own her toys. But by your logic, her parents are showing her no grace whatsoever, since they apparently reserve the right to revoke it at any given time. This is like the “grace” shown by a slavemaster to his slaves when he continues to let them live. It’s also funny to me how you’re unwittingly starting to describe Stockholm Syndrome yourself.
Jewish folks are known to raise their kids in a more “humanitarian” that the children in a way they become responsible and extremely creative. Many chinese kids can be very virtuoso in whatever they do, but they usually get good at copying things and have a really hard time at thinking out of the box.
It’s funny that must of those chinese virtuosos in violin or piano, that have been forced to study music extremely hard for years, can be easily outshined b than a poor brazilian from a slum with very little formal education makes music that has much more feeling and adds something new to the cultural landscape.
Nobody gives a shit if you can play 20 notes per second in 17/8 tempo. Well, except metal nerds.
I know we’re talking about general principles- but there are some things that you consider to be psychological torture that I don’t- which is the problem. My fault in assuming you knew what i was getting at but- Don’t rape, murder, brutalize(intentionally cause bleeding/bruising/broken bones/teeth, or other activities whose purpose is to inflict physiological or psychological damage), or teach kids how to actively aggress against anyone(like in your raise kids to be serial killers example).
No you don’t- because that’s kinda what I was trying to get at myself. That its all subjective- so you might call something abusive- I might think you’re just a Mr. Softie.
Oh don’t be so serious all the time- you’re sucking out my soul here just like Amy Chua did with her kids.
I have no idea I was around 4 years old at the time I couldn’t give you any possible logical explanation for doing it other than being chaotic. My point was that I didn’t think Amy Chua is very harsh considering what happened after her daughter was punching and kicking her(She pretty much ignored that part and just kept at working on the piano)- my parents wouldn’t have been so sweet in comparison if that was me. Punching and kicking your parents is not the appropriate or justifiable response to your parents pushing you to play piano. It’d be the appropriate response if some stranger was trying to coerce you into playing piano- but not your parents. Its a special relationship in my world. Better to know that even this situation will pass and that the parent is coming from love instead of having so much resistance.
yeah I get it- and I think you’re wrong because I don’t think a parent giving a child a task is aggression.
The truth is you don’t know if she physically forced her there- since Amy didn’t say she did. After saying “oh yes I can” with a stern look may have been all that was necessary. Why would her daughter physically resist at the piano? It doesn’t have to be for your reasons.
The parent-child relationship is unlike other human relationships such as the slavemaster and slave seeing as the parents created the child. The slavemaster never had a right to the slave- the parent has a right until the child decides they want to leave.
So perhaps grace was too strong of a word but parents are able to give kindness with conditions- and I don’t see the problem.
But that’s the thing with people it doesn’t have to be “everything” or “Nothing” if you know what I mean. Amy chua can love her child and never ACTUALLY give her toys away- but at the same time use the empty threat of taking them away just to nudge her child in a certain direction. I didn’t say it wasn’t sneaky**(I never claimed that Amy is the ultimate parent, just that she’s not a crazy psycho bitch by your definition)**- but I don’t see it being an everlasting problem either. It was something said and done in the moment and it’ll pass like everything else.
My main perspective through all this dialogue we’ve had is that nothing she did indicates to me any sort of psychological damage done to the children- its definitely strict, but its not nutty and serves a purpose- even if you don’t agree that it serves that purpose, some people do. But your comparisons to children loving strict parents to stockholm syndrome is insulting to say the least. You have the right to the opinion that that kind of stuff is abuse but I think you’re being silly. that’s all.
Lol I’m not trying to shame you into silence- I don’t care to do that. Why do you keep saying that’s my plan? You can cherish your opinions and shout them from the rooftops- its ok man. I feel like you attempt to shame me by saying I’ve had abusive parents and am probably showing symptoms of stockholm syndrome- but I’m not taking it personally I think I can see why you think the way you do.
Well you called her a bitch, insane- kaju says her children are spineless, morally bankrupt…that doesn’t exactly come off as love.