The Instigator
Bonbonwinners
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
republicofdhar
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Chinese parents should not be so harsh

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
republicofdhar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/4/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 565 times Debate No: 62645
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

Bonbonwinners

Pro

Many Chinese students are sometimes considered the top few students in the grade academic wise. However, many people don't understand how they have gotten to be such a "great" and "hard working" student. Many Chinese parents put a lot of stress on their kids, such as providing them many tutors. in my opinion, this is wrong. You need to teach them to like school! So what do you guys think?
republicofdhar

Con

Accepted bruh.

I'll be taking on the position that it is justified for Chinese parents to be "harsh". You have defined harshness as for example, proving students with many tutors. In other words, your position is that Chinese parents shouldn't place their children under heavy academic pressure. I shall argue for the opposite.

Saying that this is unique to Chinese parents puts us at risk of racial stereotyping. I'm sure every culture has parents who pressurise their children on academics. I'm also certain that there are Chinese parents in existence who do not put this kind of pressure on their children. For that reason, I'm going to ask that you define clearly what you mean by "Chinese parents". Do you mean parents living in China, of Chinese origin but living abroad? If abroad, are we talking about developed or developing countries. If you don't want to define Chinese parents, we could just go right ahead and debate on parents in general.

I note that this is your first debate, and I request that you refrain from personal anecdotes, because they aren't very strong in the way of evidence. You may do well to find reliable sources from online to substantiate your claims. I look forward to hearing your reasons and arguments in Round 2.

*bow*
Debate Round No. 1
Bonbonwinners

Pro

Bonbonwinners forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Bonbonwinners

Pro

Bonbonwinners forfeited this round.
republicofdhar

Con

Extended.
Debate Round No. 3
Bonbonwinners

Pro

Bonbonwinners forfeited this round.
republicofdhar

Con

I shall make only one argument. In the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) tests, the top three regions have a significant Chinese population: China, Hong Kong and Singapore. U.S.A. comes 24th, 28th and 26th in Reading, Maths and Science. It is natural to then assume that the efforts of Chinese parents in motivating their children have led to better results. Better results correlate directly with better future prospects, which are good for the children. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the children for Chinese parents to be harsh and they should be harsh.
Debate Round No. 4
Bonbonwinners

Pro

Bonbonwinners forfeited this round.
republicofdhar

Con

In my previous round, I said "Therefore, it is in the best interests of the children for Chinese parents to be harsh and they should be harsh." That came across rather clumsily and I would like to clarify. Pro insists that certain behaviour of Chinese parents can be reasonably construed as "harsh". Based on his interpretation of "harshness", however, Chinese students are excelling academically. Therefore, Chinese parents are entitled to be "harsh", although I don't believe that this is actually true. As a digression, the entire resolution of this debate is a generalization, unless properly supported (which I don't think is the case).

Thank you for this debate.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by republicofdhar 2 years ago
republicofdhar
Wow, that makes things clearer. Thanks! Interesting views, I imagine its an attitude of self-preservation. He vaguely reminds me of Tom Buchanan from The Great Gatsby. A character fixated on self-preservation.
Posted by Atmas 2 years ago
Atmas
He's talking about the various ways our american society has infiltrated the common household to institute rules. Spanking your child, for instance, was a common punishment and widely accepted, but now it is a form of child abuse and you can have your children taken away. The old traditional way of thinking was that the parents know how to best handle their children, but there are so many cases where the parents were obviously incapable of providing a decent life to their kids, that the public just has to step in; or risk those kids having a terrible childhood. He's clearly a republican/conservative who thinks life was better in the 50s when the man ruled the household, blacks were second class citizens, everyone followed the status quo, and war was glorious. How anyone can be against progressiveness is beyond me.
Posted by republicofdhar 2 years ago
republicofdhar
What on earth are you talking about?
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
I think you need to butt out of other peoples business.That seems to be the prevailing occupation in America today. How can I make people do what I think is right.That is the driving force of liberalism.And that is why liberals always gravitate to government.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
BonbonwinnersrepublicofdharTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Zanomi3 2 years ago
Zanomi3
BonbonwinnersrepublicofdharTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con because of Pro's forfeit. Arguments for obvious reasons, seeing as Pro failed to provide any.