Tiger Mom’s claim that cultures blessed with ‘triple package’ get ahead in America sparks uproar
Amy Chua, the self-professed Tiger Mom who courted controversy with her bestselling book touting the superiority of Chinese mothers, is stirring a much bigger pot this time: Her new book claims that a short list of cultural groups outperform others in America.
In the book, Ms. Chua and co-author/husband Jed Rubenfeld — both law professors at Yale — name eight groups whose members have risen to the ranks of the rich and smart and powerful.
Mormons, they write, have recently experienced “astonishing business success.” Cubans in Miami, they say, have “climbed from poverty to prosperity in a generation.” They point to the stunningly high number of Nigerians who earn doctorate degrees, and to the extraordinarily high incomes of Jewish Americans. Also making the list: Indian-, Chinese-, Iranian- and Lebanese-Americans.
These groups boast the ‘‘triple package’’: superiority, insecurity and impulse control.
“That certain groups do much better in America than others—as measured by income, occupational status, test scores, and so on — is difficult to talk about,” they write. “In large part this is because the topic feels racially charged.”
The inference that all other groups are somehow lesser — and the sweeping categorization of ‘‘groups’’ by cultural background or immigrant status — has rankled critics, who dismiss the book and its arguments as shock bait, an irresponsible festival of stereotypes that doesn’t account for fundamental inequalities that date back generations.
“The message of Chua’s book is based on a fairytale, an ahistorical view of the world where the playing field is even,” wrote ChangeLab blogger Soya Jung. “It asks us to forget that the present is built upon the past, that the real and brutal terrain of American enterprise is rife with racial bluffs and potholes forged over centuries.”
Both authors happen to belong to the superior groups, New York Post reviewer Maureen Callaghan wryly pointed out.
Asked about the controversy on Monday, sociologists and anthropologists said that despite its merits, the discussion of cultural difference inevitably becomes a minefield of assumptions, stereotypes and political correctness, especially when considered in the Western context.
“It should be possible to discuss cultural differences without evoking charges of racism,” said Morton Weinfeld, who holds the Chair in Canadian Ethnic Studies at McGill University.
“In my view, cultures are important and cultures can differ — otherwise, why are we discussing multiculturalism and reasonable accommodation?”
And yet that discussion quickly becomes “controversial” when groups as a whole are touted as successful, the way Ms. Chua and Mr. Rubenfeld present cultural groups in The Triple Package.
“The implication,” he said, “is that others aren’t.”
Categorizing certain groups as superior to others — even if the focus is squared on what the rest of the world might learn from them — is fundamentally racist, says Frances Henry, a professor emerita in the department of anthropology at York University, whose focus is racial studies.
She calls the ranking “dangerous, in terms of the spread of stereotyping.”
It’s who is excluded, which is as important as who she does include
“It’s who is excluded, which is as important as who she does include,” she said of Ms. Chua’s list.
“Rankings like that, the Nazis did that too, and other oppressors did that — they ranked people based upon supposed group characteristics. And if you want to go back earlier in history, that’s the way 19th century racist philosophers used to think about differences in cultural groups; that some were in the realm of civilization, they were the great ones, and the bottom of the list were ordinary savages.”
It’s more valuable to focus on the characteristics of individuals, not groups, she said. Indeed, cultures have a way of attaching value to certain characteristics, Prof. Henry said, but that doesn’t make it right to paint an entire culture with the same brush.
“One of the common mistakes made is to take culture or cultural values as an exogenous cause, as naturally coming by itself, producing consequences we make a big fuss of,” said Peter Li, a professor of sociology at the University of Saskatchewan who studies immigration. “The reality is, they are more likely to be produced by systems of equalities and opportunities of the past. And then, in turn, they might influence future opportunities and equality.”
Edward O’Neill found himself piping up in defence of Ms. Chua on Twitter Monday. The educational technologist in Los Angeles calls himself an “apologist for people who are too hastily bashed,” and he’d put Ms. Chua in that category.
“What she talked about was culture, what you value, what are your habits, how do you live your life — it’s not about genes,” he said. “I haven’t looked at the new book, but I’d be very surprised if she said genetically Chinese are smarter. To me, that would be racist.”
People should actually listen to her arguments rather than read headlines on Twitter and follow the crowd, said Mr. O’Neill, who earned his PhD at UCLA.
However, most people will have to wait — the book won’t be published for another month.
“Wouldn’t it be great if no one bought Amy Chua and husband Jed Rubenfeld’s new book about being superior to other people?” Mommy & Media Mania tweeted Monday evening.
Wouldn't it be great if no one bought Amy Chua and husband Jed Rubenfeld's new book about being superior to other people?—
Mommy & Media Mania (@MommyAndMedia) January 06, 2014
About an hour earlier, Ms. Chua tweeted a link to the book: “It comes out Feb. 4.”
Here's the website for our new book, which comes out Feb. 4!
thetriplepackage.com—
Amy Chua (@amychua) January 06, 2014
• Email: sboesveld@nationalpost.com | Twitter: sarahboesveld
Posted in: News Tags: World, Amy Chua, Jed Rubenfeld
Tiger Mom’s claim that cultures blessed with ‘triple package’ get ahead in America sparks uproar
Amy Chua, the self-professed Tiger Mom who courted controversy with her bestselling book touting the superiority of Chinese mothers, is stirring a much bigger pot this time: Her new book claims that a short list of cultural groups outperform others in America.
In the book, Ms. Chua and co-author/husband Jed Rubenfeld — both law professors at Yale — name eight groups whose members have risen to the ranks of the rich and smart and powerful.
Mormons, they write, have recently experienced “astonishing business success.” Cubans in Miami, they say, have “climbed from poverty to prosperity in a generation.” They point to the stunningly high number of Nigerians who earn doctorate degrees, and to the extraordinarily high incomes of Jewish Americans. Also making the list: Indian-, Chinese-, Iranian- and Lebanese-Americans.
These groups boast the ‘‘triple package’’: superiority, insecurity and impulse control.
“That certain groups do much better in America than others—as measured by income, occupational status, test scores, and so on — is difficult to talk about,” they write. “In large part this is because the topic feels racially charged.”
The inference that all other groups are somehow lesser — and the sweeping categorization of ‘‘groups’’ by cultural background or immigrant status — has rankled critics, who dismiss the book and its arguments as shock bait, an irresponsible festival of stereotypes that doesn’t account for fundamental inequalities that date back generations.
“The message of Chua’s book is based on a fairytale, an ahistorical view of the world where the playing field is even,” wrote ChangeLab blogger Soya Jung. “It asks us to forget that the present is built upon the past, that the real and brutal terrain of American enterprise is rife with racial bluffs and potholes forged over centuries.”
Both authors happen to belong to the superior groups, New York Post reviewer Maureen Callaghan wryly pointed out.
Asked about the controversy on Monday, sociologists and anthropologists said that despite its merits, the discussion of cultural difference inevitably becomes a minefield of assumptions, stereotypes and political correctness, especially when considered in the Western context.
“It should be possible to discuss cultural differences without evoking charges of racism,” said Morton Weinfeld, who holds the Chair in Canadian Ethnic Studies at McGill University.
“In my view, cultures are important and cultures can differ — otherwise, why are we discussing multiculturalism and reasonable accommodation?”
And yet that discussion quickly becomes “controversial” when groups as a whole are touted as successful, the way Ms. Chua and Mr. Rubenfeld present cultural groups in The Triple Package.
“The implication,” he said, “is that others aren’t.”
Categorizing certain groups as superior to others — even if the focus is squared on what the rest of the world might learn from them — is fundamentally racist, says Frances Henry, a professor emerita in the department of anthropology at York University, whose focus is racial studies.
She calls the ranking “dangerous, in terms of the spread of stereotyping.”
It’s who is excluded, which is as important as who she does include
“It’s who is excluded, which is as important as who she does include,” she said of Ms. Chua’s list.
“Rankings like that, the Nazis did that too, and other oppressors did that — they ranked people based upon supposed group characteristics. And if you want to go back earlier in history, that’s the way 19th century racist philosophers used to think about differences in cultural groups; that some were in the realm of civilization, they were the great ones, and the bottom of the list were ordinary savages.”
It’s more valuable to focus on the characteristics of individuals, not groups, she said. Indeed, cultures have a way of attaching value to certain characteristics, Prof. Henry said, but that doesn’t make it right to paint an entire culture with the same brush.
“One of the common mistakes made is to take culture or cultural values as an exogenous cause, as naturally coming by itself, producing consequences we make a big fuss of,” said Peter Li, a professor of sociology at the University of Saskatchewan who studies immigration. “The reality is, they are more likely to be produced by systems of equalities and opportunities of the past. And then, in turn, they might influence future opportunities and equality.”
Edward O’Neill found himself piping up in defence of Ms. Chua on Twitter Monday. The educational technologist in Los Angeles calls himself an “apologist for people who are too hastily bashed,” and he’d put Ms. Chua in that category.
“What she talked about was culture, what you value, what are your habits, how do you live your life — it’s not about genes,” he said. “I haven’t looked at the new book, but I’d be very surprised if she said genetically Chinese are smarter. To me, that would be racist.”
People should actually listen to her arguments rather than read headlines on Twitter and follow the crowd, said Mr. O’Neill, who earned his PhD at UCLA.
However, most people will have to wait — the book won’t be published for another month.
“Wouldn’t it be great if no one bought Amy Chua and husband Jed Rubenfeld’s new book about being superior to other people?” Mommy & Media Mania tweeted Monday evening.
Wouldn't it be great if no one bought Amy Chua and husband Jed Rubenfeld's new book about being superior to other people?—
Mommy & Media Mania (@MommyAndMedia) January 06, 2014
About an hour earlier, Ms. Chua tweeted a link to the book: “It comes out Feb. 4.”
Here's the website for our new book, which comes out Feb. 4!
thetriplepackage.com—
Amy Chua (@amychua) January 06, 2014
• Email: sboesveld@nationalpost.com | Twitter: sarahboesveld
Posted in: News Tags: World, Amy Chua, Jed Rubenfeld
Tiger Mom’s claim that cultures blessed with ‘triple package’ get ahead in America sparks uproar