Where did the stigma that Americans(esp WASP)always lacked filial piety even in the past come from?

Griffith

Banned
I found this thread.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AsianParen...u10/asian_parents_especially_first_generation

And with a bit of research inspired from reading that I came across this.

http://www.janiechang.com/blog/there-is-no-filial-piety-in-america

As someone of half Hispanic origin (specifically my paternal father came from Nicaragua), I recognized everything the reddit poster and the blog states. I hear from much of my Latino extended family about how kids in America are so rude, how many American white kids would get smacked in the face for their behavior back at home, etc.

However like the reddit post, I also hear comments that assume Americans were always the rude rebel type such as "people here must be rude because the country was founded by spoiled brats who didn't respect their family's wishes and were too greedy to pay taxes" (in reference to the Revolution) and stuff of that nature. Some of my relatives even frequently make comments about how they cannot believe George Washington was such a obedient child who decided not to enlist in the Navy because he didn't want to hurt his mother's feelings and such in accurate movies and biopics documentaries.

Even than historical works of fiction often show Americans as individualist minded who have no qualms about rebelling against the family as seen in Westerns and business themed movies.

I am wondering why this image of "rude disrespectful" and "rebel bad boy" Americans have come to dominate to the point so many people assume Americans never knew the concept of the 5th Commandment: "Honor they mother and Father"?

I mean for Christ sake the first truly (non-Indian) American religion, Mormonism, is so big on family structure and filial piety that it ranks only second to faith in God and the LDS church and there was a time certain sects within Mormonism actually expected followers to kill their children for disrespect (a crime only reserved for apostasy, blasphemy, murder, and rape).

If the first natively created white man's religion was so big on filial piety, how did America come to be a nation that historically was always "rebels and badboys"?

In particular how come WASP is the biggest target of this assumption? I mean The Godfather portrays Italian Americans as being the embodiment of filial piety but many of the WASP are shown as independent minded (particularly Michael's love Kay). Even though this was still a period of relative conservatism where bad manners on the dining table warrant a slap from your Methodist Grandma. The American Tale also portrays Russian immigrants in the same manner too.


I have seen many accounts in the past did indeed match the first link not just from my neighbors but in historical diaries and writings by Southerners during the Antebellum and Civil War periods that matches the reddit links description of expected manners towards the parents and elderly.

Its not just the South, many cowboy and homesteaders had a "Confucianesque" sort of family structure and respect for your legal guardians as I started reading about Texas, Wyoming, and especially Utah and their social history.

Its not gone either. I live near the Appalachian and man I have never seen people so subservient to their elders (not just ma and pa but grandma, great uncle Chuck, etc). You'd think you were living in China with the way they treat elders with reverence.

Can any body explain how America got so entwined with rebellion, independence, and standing up against parents that people assume the country was always like this (and why many historical movies, novels,etc inaccurately show people like this even in time period and regions where family structure and the 5th commandments was strong)?
 
SPOILERS FOR THE BIG SICK BELOW

This is probably better left for pre-1900, and probably has a million answers. I would suggest that American culture has historically been more willing to be truthful about the potential for flaws in family dynamics than other cultures. We might hold up certain ideals where family is concerned, but most people treat them as just that: ideals. Not applicable to everyone. Let's not pretend those people don't exist, or can't find their own way in life. Ragged Dick can be an orphan now and a self-made man later. Even first-generation immigrants like Kumail Nanjiani can come to America, find success, and decide there are aspects to his life more important than his family (even if, in the end, everything works out). And that's coming from one of those cultures that supposedly has an iron-clad commitment to family.
 
I mean, I think this is a classic case of people projecting something that's a relatively recent development (or at least the product of historical characteristics) onto some ur-national character, sort of like the "invention" of Bushido, as well as in a odd way, reading what was always an "ideal type" of the forward-thinking, independent young (man) making their own way in the world*. If I were to trace this shift, I would really look at social histories and "history of childhood", but I would really look at the early 20th century onwards as a point when both the category of "teenager" solidified and when major social changes in schooling and in intergenerational norm shifts happened. If I have time I will research and update.

*In these works of fiction, it's never an "unmotivated" decision. It's always because of some talent or ability, recognized by others with qualifications to judge that talent, not "randomass decision.
 
America was founded on "bad taste" and forged in "cheap energy", this is just part of the "bad taste" side. It is more important to hold in esteem someone worthy rather than just automatically gifting that respect out of an accident of birth, even when such a choice would be looked upon with chagrin and disgust by most of the civilized world.
 
Last edited:
I mean, I think this is a classic case of people projecting something that's a relatively recent development (or at least the product of historical characteristics) onto some ur-national character, sort of like the "invention" of Bushido, as well as in a odd way, reading what was always an "ideal type" of the forward-thinking, independent young (man) making their own way in the world*. If I were to trace this shift, I would really look at social histories and "history of childhood", but I would really look at the early 20th century onwards as a point when both the category of "teenager" solidified and when major social changes in schooling and in intergenerational norm shifts happened. If I have time I will research and update.

*In these works of fiction, it's never an "unmotivated" decision. It's always because of some talent or ability, recognized by others with qualifications to judge that talent, not "randomass decision.

Well, the self-made man thing goes back at least a little further. Trying to get away from "family is destiny" is a big part of the American Dream narrative in at least the 19th century. I don't think something like Ragged Dick was meant as an explicit rejection of familial ties, it's just showing that in America you can make it without those as long as you work hard (or so the story goes).
 

Griffith

Banned
America was founded on "bad taste" and forged in "cheap energy", this is just part of the "bad taste" side. It is more important to hold in esteem someone worthy rather than just automatically gifting that respect out of an accident of birth, even when such an action would be looked upon with chagrin and disgust by most of the civilized world.

Have you even read my OP? I mean Appalachians are 100% White American Protestants. Yet they are arguably even far more respectful towards elders than most Asian Americans raised in the country and even many middle class kids in mainland Asia today. If Appalachians who are the embodiment of WASP culture and values have filial piety, why does this stereotype exist?

I'm not even counting Utah Mormon, the Deep South, the Western cowboy states such as Texas, the Cajuns, and other traditionally "WHITE" group and subcultures in America.

Even in Middle Class African American families who adopted many stereotypical middle class white American values (such as kicking a child out of the house once he's 18), a child is expected to be respectful and can be slapped across the face for mocking the parents or cussing at her. Hell despite being kicked out at 18, many black people take care of the same parents who booted them out during their college years once said parents get too old to work and take care of themselves.

So I cannot understand the stereotype that "Americans don't respect their parents and are ungrateful" come from.

SPOILERS FOR THE BIG SICK BELOW

This is probably better left for pre-1900, and probably has a million answers. I would suggest that American culture has historically been more willing to be truthful about the potential for flaws in family dynamics than other cultures. We might hold up certain ideals where family is concerned, but most people treat them as just that: ideals. Not applicable to everyone. Let's not pretend those people don't exist, or can't find their own way in life. Ragged Dick can be an orphan now and a self-made man later. Even first-generation immigrants like Kumail Nanjiani can come to America, find success, and decide there are aspects to his life more important than his family (even if, in the end, everything works out). And that's coming from one of those cultures that supposedly has an iron-clad commitment to family.

However historically much of American society was firmly embedded in the family structure (and not nuclear family but EXTENDED FAMILY). For examplea big reason why many Southerners loyal to the Union or opposed slavery fought for the Confederacy was simply because their adherence to the family structure-esp filial piety to parents-was so strong it was put first before the country and moral beliefs.

FUCK I don't think you could survive in clustered places like New York and Chicago without having a family back considering how ruthless the capitalist system was and how racist the cities can be.

Lets not forget the "self-made" American man and "rugged individualist" are just mere ideals too. There are far too many instances of gifted men choosing to conform to their family rather than running away to become successful businessmen or eloping with a girl from an enemy family, etc.

Not to mention the self made man is a concept so laden with cherrypicking and confirmation bias. For every Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie,I can point to plenty of companies that failed in the time period and hundreds of enthusiastic talented men who fail and become homeless bums or commit suicide.
 
Right, but I think there's a distinction-a subtle but important one-between that and specific norms of intergenerational interaction. Also, this may get political.
 
Lets not forget the "self-made" American man and "rugged individualist" are just mere ideals too. There are far too many instances of gifted men choosing to conform to their family rather than running away to become successful businessmen or eloping with a girl from an enemy family, etc.

Not to mention the self made man is a concept so laden with cherrypicking and confirmation bias. For every Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie,I can point to plenty of companies that failed in the time period and hundreds of enthusiastic talented men who fail and become homeless bums or commit suicide.

It's a bullshit concept, I absolutely agree with you, but one that is undeniably part of the culture. Maybe it's only as real as Santa Claus, but you can't tell me he hasn't had a big impact on the culture, know what I mean?

I would be interested in seeing evidence that filial obligation and not racism drove people to support the confederacy.

And I think you could probably find examples of people surviving and flourishing in ruthless capitalist cities without a traditional family structure. The point isn't that America doesn't have strong family ties, it's that unlike other countries we did a better job of recognizing that the breakdown of these ties occurs from time to time, perhaps even frequently, and that doesn't have to be the end of the world. Maybe that distinction is disappearing now, but I think in the past it was a fairly unique aspect of many white settler colonies and their successor states.
 
Have you even read my OP? .

Yes, I did...the people who came to this country left that "European/Old World" crap of "doing the same thing the same way over and over again because that's they way it's been forever" behind. It's one of the reasons they came here. The only people perpetuating the old ways are...wait for it...parents, church elders, rich pricks, etc
 
I have a slight suspicion that academic papers have been written on this, and certainly people in more appropriate fields can
speak on the subject with more certainty, but...

...Appalachians are 100% White American Protestants...
...Utah Mormon, the Deep South, the Western cowboy states such as Texas, the Cajuns...
Are those the subcultures and areas the average immigrant, present or historical, is going to come into closer contact with?
Or is the average immigrant, at least in the past, going to get his first impression of American manners from the urban masses of wherever they end up
before they save enough to go settle the prairie?

Also, I'm pretty sure that the people of the Appalachians are not the embodiment of WASP culture, on account of them - according to the stereotypes/descriptions
I have been given - are Scots-Irish and thus presumably merely WP

FUCK I don't think you could survive in clustered places like New York and Chicago without having a family back considering how ruthless the capitalist system was and how racist the cities can be.
That's why they had gangs and more respectable ethnic associations.
A lot of people, even minors, came alone, often with the intention that the rest of the family would come along later, when enough money had been made.

Anyway, my immediate theory, for which I have no actual sources to point to, is roughly that the idea goes back to the waves of immigration to the US
in the first half of the 19th century and took on a life of its own.
It goes rougly like this (and I probably miss a few steps):
Family emigrates to America and, as you do, end up in Five Points or its local equivalent.
Family notes that a lot of the local youths - most visibly those that are most clearly "Americanized"
(or at least clearly not good little [insert ethnicity] boys and girls) are hooligans and layabouts.
Ergo Americans kids are rude and disrespectful, unlike good little [insert ethnicity] boys and girls.
Repeat with each new immigration group.
Until it takes on a life of its own.

Sort of the reverse of how [latest large immigrant group] is stupid, uneducated, unable to learn good English
and eats strange smelly things.
 
I have a slight suspicion that academic papers have been written on this, and certainly people in more appropriate fields can
speak on the subject with more certainty, but...


Are those the subcultures and areas the average immigrant, present or historical, is going to come into closer contact with?
Or is the average immigrant, at least in the past, going to get his first impression of American manners from the urban masses of wherever they end up
before they save enough to go settle the prairie?

Also, I'm pretty sure that the people of the Appalachians are not the embodiment of WASP culture, on account of them - according to the stereotypes/descriptions
I have been given - are Scots-Irish and thus presumably merely WP

You would be surprised actually. There were quite a few historical Chinese communities in the rural south, and quite a few small Jewish communities in Appalachia and the rural south, not to mention an assortment of other immigrant communities-the oldest functioning mosque in the US for example. A lot of these have dwindled as children move to larger cities for more opportunities, but there are still some. Of course most immigrants wound up in New York or other major cities but it was hardly unknown to settle in more varied places.
 
You would be surprised actually. There were quite a few historical Chinese communities in the rural south, and quite a few small Jewish communities in Appalachia and the rural south, not to mention an assortment of other immigrant communities-the oldest functioning mosque in the US for example. A lot of these have dwindled as children move to larger cities for more opportunities, but there are still some. Of course most immigrants wound up in New York or other major cities but it was hardly unknown to settle in more varied places.
So, in other words: No, these are not the subcultures and areas the average immigrant is going to come into closer
contact with, and the groups within each immigrant group that do are unlikely to be the ones whose impression of
majority Americans will dominate the perception and stereotype of the same.
 
I remember being told by a Korean woman that the USA pressures other countries into showing The Simpsons at times when children are up, thus exposing the youth of the world to the rebellious, anti-parental attitudes of Bart Simpson.

However, this woman also believed that the dastardly yanks only show The Simpsons in the evening, so as to not corrupt their own children. I don't personally know what time The Simpsons shows in the USA(I'm guessing the syndicated re-runs go all hours), but in any case, I doubt the Americans have had much success in shielding their own kids from the influence of Bart Simpson.

(This woman also mentioned having a French boyfriend, and I'm wondering if he was the source of her info. When styling Canadian girls, he probably makes fun of the Americans for their puritanical patriarchy.)
 
What is this thread even about?

TL/DR: Some people think American kids are generally disrespectful toward their parents and families, but the OP thinks the opposite is true.

For myself, I agree that it depends what segment of US society you're lookling at, and also that media-filter makes a difference. If you're a liberal Canadian from downtown Toronto, and you move down to rural Alabama(for some reason), you're probably gonna think it's an Old Testament patriarchy. If you're a Muslim, even from one of the more liberal regions, and you move to San Francisco(or probably even just Minneapolis), it's probably gonna seem like Huxley's Brave New World.

Koreans who have lived in the US tell me they think the country is more individualistic and less family-centric than their homeland. That's second-hand reportage, but it seems to be the consistent trend. And it seems to be the common perception of the west in general, not just the USA.
 
Top