Talk:Tiger parenting

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Tkwak5.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 August 2018 and 7 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SFWehmeyer.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 October 2019 and 13 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alam29.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

NPOV dispute on section "Effects"

In the section Effects, there are way too many negative consequences of tiger parenting that overweigh the positive consequences of tiger parenting. WP:NPOV states that the article should not give any undue weight to any viewpoint. What should be done is that more paragraphs about the positive side of tiger parenting should be added to the section. DSCrowned^(talk) 09:19, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Tiger Mom Questions

For most of the articles I read about the tiger moms, it seem to be considered abusive by many nowadays. Do you think that it is abusive or if the tiger moms teachings are appropriate and needed for the children's in Asia?

Another question to be about the childrens in Asia developing depression and self-loath faster than most. What do you think is needed to stop this?

By Tkwak5 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tkwak5 (talk • contribs) 21:15, November 13, 2016 (UTC)

References

Tiger Mom Questions

Questions: 1. Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?— Tkwak5 (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC). 2. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?— Tkwak5 (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC). Cite And Website References http://www.medicaldaily.com/tiger-moms-may-help-their-kids-succeed-it-comes-psychological-cost-304606— Tkwak5 (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC). http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2011/05/depressed_students_south_Korea— Tkwak5 (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC). Answers: 1. The fact seem to come from a reliable reference as both website use many examples to prove their studies such as the book of "Amy Chua’s Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother", a 2011 book that compared and contrast the traditional Chinese upbringings to those of the Western kind. As well as a survey released by the Institute for Social Development Studies that shows that Korean teenagers suffer stress and depression the most compare to other kids in other countries. These multiple sources and evidence that they use books and survey shows that they use reliable references.— Tkwak5 (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC). 2. The articles seem to be neutral from what how I read through the articles. Like my answers above, they use multiple references such as books and surveys to show evidence and why tiger moms give stress to their kids. There was no "I believe" or "I think" from their articles. So from what I read from the articles, I frimly believe that they there are no heavy biased toward what they talk about. Everything seems pretty fair and neutral.— Tkwak5 (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC). By Tkwak5— Tkwak5 (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC).

@Tkwak5: I prefer that the next time, you reply with the ":" prefix on my post rather than reply in a separate header. However, I see what you mean. Because of WP:WEIGHT, those viewpoints are adequately balanced. Positive connotations are indeed taken into account with the negative majority, which is fairly granted with most of the attention, as studies reveal. Blame my misinterpretation on this. The neutrality template will now be removed as the dispute has been resolved. Thanks! DSCrowned^(talk) 13:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 13 February 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Tiger parenting. There's rough consensus to move to this title and review of the article shows that, although the content started with focus on "mother" instance of the practice; this has gradually expanded to more about the whole concept than from single perspective. And naturally so will continue as the article keeps expanding. (non-admin closure) –Ammarpad (talk) 06:38, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

---

Tiger mother → Tiger parent – Sources (e.g. APA in 2013 - see references 6 and 7 on the main page) have quickly broadened the term from simply mother to parent. The recent case of Jennifer Pan highlights the devastating role that a "tiger father" can play on a child. The article uses the term "parent/ing" 54 times (vs. mother/s 29 times), and should therefore be renamed to reflect this broader and more inclusive viewpoint. JabberJaw (talk) 02:37, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Comment: Both those sources primarily describe the topic as tiger parenting... any reason we shouldn't use that, per WP:GERUND, so that the title describes the practice rather than the practitioner? -- Netoholic @ 02:56, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I did consider that. A simple Google search results in 9,210,000 hits for "tiger parent" and 2,980,000 for "tiger parenting". Also, given that the original title uses "mother" I then thought that the equation of mother+father=parent seemed logical. JabberJaw (talk) 03:05, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Google Trends has the parent/parenting terms neck-and-neck, but "tiger mom" dominates (and anecdotally, I hear that more commonly than "tiger mother"). I dunno, have to give it some more thought, but I am leaning toward "parenting" (to show the focus is on the practice itself) and not sweat the differences. -- Netoholic @ 03:18, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

• Support alternative move to Tiger parenting. Article is more about the practice._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 13:41, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

South and Southeast Asia

@Backendgaming: Why do you keep erasing "South and Southeast Asia" from the lead and the rest of the article? I've added two sources confirming the method is prevalent in countries in those regions, including one about Amy Chua speaking about tiger mums of India. So what is your problem? The second sources literally discusses the tiger parenting model among Singaporean Chinese, Malay and Indian parents. So why do you keep removing it? Can we please solve this? (101.160.137.188 (talk) 00:43, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

I'm not trying to say it's prevalent across the whole of the two regions, that's why it said "in areas of South and Southeast Asia". Afghanistan is a gray area that's sometimes considered Central Asian and sometimes South Asian, I'm not including Afghanistan in this definition. Hope that makes sense. (101.160.137.188 (talk) 00:46, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

I'm trying to articulate the origins of the Tiger Mother concept and neologism right now in the article. You keep reverting what I previously stated and sourced. You can say that there are similar parenting styles, phenomenons or methods unique to South and Southeast Asians. But my argument solely rests on the point that "Tiger parenting" is a creation and concept born out and influenced from Confucianism as sourced Here, Here, and Here. Second of all, you should realize that Singapore is 75% Chinese and with a population being 75% Chinese, there's bound to be strong Confucianist influence. Same thing in Malaysia with Malaysia first being a Muslim country with no ancient and medieval Chinese Confucianist influence throughout its entire history until very recently due to modern Chinese and Indian immigration during the British colonial era. In addition Confucianism had no impact and influence in India as is South Asia and Southeast Asia with completely different histories and cultural contexts. Backendgaming (talk) 01:02, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Reverting your edits? I'm not reverting your edits, where did I do that? I'm only adding information to your edits. So what about the sources I provided? Are they invalid? How is that fair? You claim that it is a Chinese-American concept, then how can it be prevalent in East Asian countries? Have you had a look at the sources I provided? (101.160.137.188 (talk) 01:08, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

Chinese or Chinese American, what matters is the root and the root all is the same, Chinese. Confucianism later spread across East Asia since China in ancient and medieval times was the most powerful and during those times, heavily influenced Japanese and Korean culture as I sourced Here. Confucianism and Chinese civilization had absolutely no impact and influence in South Asia, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia with the small exceptions of Singapore and Vietnam. Nonetheless, Singapore is 75% Chinese and China dominated Vietnam four times throughout its imperial history and although Vietnam which still incorporates Confucianism in its culture but they don't use Chinese characters in its writing system anymore. Backendgaming (talk) 01:20, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

You're ignoring my sources. Have you read them? Amy Chua, of all people, spoke about the tiger mother phenomenon of India. So are you going to erase her words because it doesn't fit your narrative? (101.160.137.188 (talk) 01:22, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

First of all, I checked your sources, they only talk about similar parenting phenomenons in other countries and your sources make no mention where the origin of Tiger parenting first took root. With respect to your India assertion, the article you sourced only talks about India's own growing independent tiger parenting phenomenon which to me seems that India is just trying to take advantage of Amy Chua's book when in fact tiger parenting has been deeply rooted in Chinese Confucianism long before Amy Chua ever came along. Second, I'm not asserting a narrative, just stating where the origin of tiger parenting came from and it how it first became a phenomenon in China and later East Asia. What I'm also arguing is that modern Tiger parenting is deeply rooted in Confucianism as I sourced Here and and here, a historical fact documented in Analects of Confucius two millennia long before Amy Chua even came up with the modern concept herself. What Amy Chua speaks of the Indian tiger parenting phenomenon doesn't change the fact that the origin of Tiger parenting is Chinese, born out of the teachings of Confucius and Confucianist doctrine. Backendgaming (talk) 01:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@Backendgaming: With all due respect I wholeheartedly disagree, India is not taking advantage of "tiger parenting". I'm not Indian but I've read in Indian culture, parenting styles that are akin to what Amy Chua has discussed are prevalent. Strict parenting that emphasises academic success and not bringing shame to the family are common in Indian culture. I guess in this case, Chua is using her term to refer to the mothers that employ this style or similar style of parenting. Nevertheless I see that you're happy with the proposed new lead. I can add it in if you want and once I've done that you can make any changes regarding placement of sources or things like that. Is that okay? I'm happy that we were able to come up with a consensus. (101.160.137.188 (talk) 02:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

I honestly think the lead needs to be re-written. The term was coined by Amy Chua, before that there was not such term. However, the style of parenting in all it's diversity was pretty common in Asian cultures before "tiger mother" even came into existence. So maybe we should exclude the inclusion of countries until later. I have this as a proposal. Tiger parenting is a term which refers to strict or demanding parents who push and pressure their children to be successful academically by attaining high levels of scholastic and academic achievement, using authoritarian parenting methods regarded as typical of childrearing. The term was coined by Yale law professor Amy Chua in her 2011 memoir Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother. A largely Chinese-American concept, it has parallels in the societies of Mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan and South Korea as well as in areas of South Asia and Southeast Asia. What do you think? (101.160.137.188 (talk) 01:24, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

Sounds like a fair and well thought opening. I'll add it later. And for the Indian tiger parenting phenomenon, I would also suggest that a separate article about that phenomenon can be created. Backendgaming (talk) 02:05, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@Backendgaming: Thanks for making the changes and I also want to add that I really like the way you have highlighted the "Chinese tiger mum" phenomenon in Chinese communities and introduced that into the lead. I definitely agree with the inclusion of "Confucianist East Asian societies". Believe it or not, I had initially intended to show you a version of the lead that I written that included, "Confucian-influenced societies" but then I removed it thinking it may make it too long. I like the new lead a lot. Yes, in regards to a subpage, that would be a good thing to do. I'll have a look at that at a later date, I'll have to make an account for that though haha. (101.160.137.188 (talk) 04:48, 25 March 2018 (UTC))

Lede

Not a Wikipedia editor, but it looks like the lede might have a typo. The first sentence reads: "Tiger mom is a form of strict parenting, whereby parents are highly invested in ensuring their children's success."

Surely, given the name of the article and the type of noun, it should read "Tiger parenting is a form of strict parenting," right? 50.117.135.97 (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Biased opinion

I think the most content are related to the article topic. But I think the sources that chosen by author is too limited and biased which is not neutral enough. Under the title effect, it is mainly talking about the negative effect on tiger parents instead of the other reasons why this situation appears in some Asian countries instead of the western countries. It didn’t talk about the traditional Chinese family or Asian family background on how their parents have a early tough life so that they hope their children have a better life of the future and so on. I think the author needs to introduce more based on the Chinese family background and develop the idea of tiger parents and build a completed image of how it appear and how it affect.X5mao (talk) 07:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Not just Asians...

Upper class colonial era whites were traditionally subjected to very strict schooling, thought necessary to thrive in hostile environments, that ultimately depressed their fertility rates as they stopped associating childhood with happiness. It's an Anglo issue in general. 50.96.89.104 (talk) 50.96.89.104 (talk) 13:24, 23 November 2022 (UTC)