Momopi, why do Chinese families take other side in dispute?

[Winston]

Dear momopi or anyone else who can comment on this issue,

Why do Taiwanese and Chinese families tend to take the other side during a dispute involving one of their own, even if their own is in the right? It's like they have a need to humble themselves and let the other party win. What is the logic behind this?

I've seen this in my family as well as other Chinese families.

Here is one example.

Long ago, my cousin (not a real cousin, just my dad's best friend's son) and I were driving from the Bay Area to Lake Tahoe. During the 3 or 4 hour drive, I got hungry and wanted to stop at a Taco Bell along the way to eat. But my cousin didn't want to and kept saying that it'd be a waste of time to stop and eat, as he was anxious to get there quickly. I think he was trying to make it to Lake Tahoe before snow closed the roads along the mountain pass, but I don't remember, as this was in the late 80's. Anyhow, I kept pestering him until he eventually gave in. When we stopped I tried to eat quickly so we would be able to get on our way. Afterward, I told my parents about this, and they got mad at me, saying that I should have been considerate of my cousin's intent on getting here quickly and not pestered him into stopping at Taco Bell.

HOWEVER, to test their objectivity, I asked them about a scenario in which the situation were reversed. I said, "What if I were the one driving and my cousin was hungry and asked me to stop at a Taco Bell, and I didn't want to? Would you then tell me, 'Winston, what is wrong with you? Taylor was hungry and wanted to stop and eat. You should have been considerate of him and stopped to let him eat!'?"

I had them on that one. My parents refused to answer this hypothetical question, because they knew that I was right. I was 100 percent sure that if the situation were reversed, they would have taken the other person's side anyway. This was the SMOKING GUN PROOF that a DOUBLE STANDARD was at work here, and that their logic in choosing which side to take was not based on an unbiased objectivity or rationality, but on some innate need to humble themselves and let the other person win.

I asked Taylor's dad about this too, and he simply avoided it and said "no comment" since it would be impolite for him to admit that I was right and that my parents were using a double standard.

It seems that I was the only objective truth seeker here, as usual.

Anyhow, can you explain why they do this, momopi? Is your family like this too? Are most Taiwanese or Chinese families you know like that too?

PS - I will be forwarding the link to this post to my dad, to see if he will admit that there was a double standard here, and how he would logically justify it. If he provides an explanation, I will post it here.

[Grunt]

Double standards can only be applied when no none bothers to stop them.

I spend a good deal of time letting American females know this.

Looks like you are being abused because they (correctly) assume you wont stand up and do a damn thing about it.

In any negotiation between good and evil, evil always wins.

[Winston]

Double standards can only be applied when no none bothers to stop them.

I spend a good deal of time letting American females know this.

Looks like you are being abused because they (correctly) assume you wont stand up and do a damn thing about it.

In any negotiation between good and evil, evil always wins.

W: This wasn't about abuse or evil though. It was about asian parents using double standards, not being objective or fair, and failing to provide a logical justification for it. Instead, they did what was in their culture (letting the other person win out of humility) and remained silent on the matter.

[Grunt]

They obviously don't need to justify their behavior because you are doing it for them!

Look, let me shed some light on this subject.

You are confused and in a state of delusion because you have never seen true reality.

You have never seen a positive, so you live in the negative.

My wifes family is dirt poor, yet they never asked for a dime because they have more dignity then to stoop to that level.

Her family also never ever interfered with our relationship. In fact, they went out of their way to not stick their collective noses into our lives. I have great respect for them due to that.

For me the situation is a "non-problem". For you, it is a thorn in your side that you refuse to remove. I said it before, Ill say it again;

They screw you because you let them.

[wraith]

Replying to your comment on another thread, yes I am of Chinese descent.

it's not because of logic, it's because of self-deprecation to make the other 'lose face' for what they have done. If you receive a gift, you typically say thank you. On the other hand, my parents would refuse the gift until they give in, this usually takes a few minutes.

But the thing is, Western families aren't as tight-knit as Chinese families are since the concept of family is the extended family to possibly anyone who bears your last name. If you marry someone with the same last name as you, it's considered to be incest, cause you might share a common patriarchal ancestor. But you can marry a first cousin who doesn't have the same last name you have. Times have been changing recently, with China's one child policy.

I know you don't like the idea of self-deprecation, Chinese people self-deprecate each other all the time.

My parents went to a restaurant with their friends. At the end of the meal, there will be fighting, not over who has to pay the bill, it's over who wants to pay the bill. So everyone wants to pay the bill, so how do you decide? The one who is more persistent in paying the bill. Maybe next time, those who didn't pay the bill would feel pressure to pay the bill next time cause they 'lost face'.

But still, my family is more 'liberal' in some aspects and more 'conservative' in other aspects compared to other Han Chinese families.

If my family felt that one of their own did something wrong and immoral or his claim to something was illegitimate, and if they felt that he is a horrible example of a family member, of course they're going to go against him, why would you help an immoral, black sheep who shares your paternal ancestor's blood? On the other hand, if the one in question is righteous and is normally humble towards others, and is in good standing with the rest of the family, they're going to back him up. Especially when you have families gossiping about their family members all the time, so it's nothing new.

[momopi]

Anyhow, can you explain why they do this, momopi? Is your family like this too? Are most Taiwanese or Chinese families you know like that too?

It's not an issue of right versus wrong, your parents simply don't want you to get into a conflict where hierarchy is not clearly defined. If it was a stranger, he may not receive the same consideration.

In my family, the elder would've simply commanded "stop the car here". Observe Chinese funerals where the eldest stand in front and younger to the back, same idea here. I get to tell my younger cousins what to do (within reason), and they don't get to do the same with me. However if you abuse your senior position, your family will simply stop associating with you.

Also, the elder is obligated to look after the younger's welfare (within reason). In your example, had I commanded my cousin to stop the car to buy snacks, I'd probably pay for their snacks too.

During the recent Southern California wild fire, I drove through the 57 freeway with fire on both sides to evacuate my younger cousin and his cat. Another cousin stayed with me because her apartment in Yorba Linda was inaccessible. I played host and paid for their upkeep for couple of days. They're not obligated to reimburse me.

My mother quit her job and moved back to Taiwan to take care of my grandmother. Her siblings chip in $$ to pay for her expenses. Her older sister gives a larger monetary contribution than the younger ones. There is no arguement or debate on who pays more or less.

[wraith]

I agree with momopi.

Elders are to take care of the younger members of their family, so it's a matter of hierarchy rather than logic. In a situation where the hierarchy isn't well defined, like between my parents and their relatives (around the same age), then you'd have to be more self-deprecating than the other, to avoid a conflict.

Confucianism is a philosophy based on social stratification and how one social class should deal with another, and how there should be less conflict between two people. If you've ever studied Confucianism, then you'd have a different point of view of it. For example, my parents tell me to study hard to get a good job. What they say isn't without reason or logic. They worked hard to come to the US, raise their children, earn an income, and want their children to do good. Confucianism stresses education to such an extent that traditionally, before the 20th century, Chinese families had male children who studied for years to become a civil worker, eventually a government official, and lastly, a member of the imperial court.

If I had to take care of a younger relative (I only have a younger cousin, and some other 'younger' relatives), If any of them went out of line, my parents and their parents would blame me for not taking care of them. Makes sense since you're older and you're supposed to teach your younger relatives morals, ethics, and how to be good people. Since I was raised by my parents and an older sister in the US, I haven't had much contact with my other relatives in family.

In my last post, Chinese seldom split the bill. It's either all or nothing.

[Winston]

They obviously don't need to justify their behavior because you are doing it for them!

Look, let me shed some light on this subject.

You are confused and in a state of delusion because you have never seen true reality.

You have never seen a positive, so you live in the negative.

My wifes family is dirt poor, yet they never asked for a dime because they have more dignity then to stoop to that level.

Her family also never ever interfered with our relationship. In fact, they went out of their way to not stick their collective noses into our lives. I have great respect for them due to that.

For me the situation is a "non-problem". For you, it is a thorn in your side that you refuse to remove. I said it before, Ill say it again;

They screw you because you let them.

W: Grunt, I think you misread my post. This is NOT about Dianne's family. This is about MY PARENTS and about something that happened back in the late 80's. I think you are confusing the two topics. Read it over again. LOL

[Winston]

Replying to your comment on another thread, yes I am of Chinese descent.

it's not because of logic, it's because of self-deprecation to make the other 'lose face' for what they have done. If you receive a gift, you typically say thank you. On the other hand, my parents would refuse the gift until they give in, this usually takes a few minutes.

But the thing is, Western families aren't as tight-knit as Chinese families are since the concept of family is the extended family to possibly anyone who bears your last name. If you marry someone with the same last name as you, it's considered to be incest, cause you might share a common patriarchal ancestor. But you can marry a first cousin who doesn't have the same last name you have. Times have been changing recently, with China's one child policy.

I know you don't like the idea of self-deprecation, Chinese people self-deprecate each other all the time.

My parents went to a restaurant with their friends. At the end of the meal, there will be fighting, not over who has to pay the bill, it's over who wants to pay the bill. So everyone wants to pay the bill, so how do you decide? The one who is more persistent in paying the bill. Maybe next time, those who didn't pay the bill would feel pressure to pay the bill next time cause they 'lost face'.

But still, my family is more 'liberal' in some aspects and more 'conservative' in other aspects compared to other Han Chinese families.

If my family felt that one of their own did something wrong and immoral or his claim to something was illegitimate, and if they felt that he is a horrible example of a family member, of course they're going to go against him, why would you help an immoral, black sheep who shares your paternal ancestor's blood? On the other hand, if the one in question is righteous and is normally humble towards others, and is in good standing with the rest of the family, they're going to back him up. Especially when you have families gossiping about their family members all the time, so it's nothing new.

W: My family is like that too. But what does being close knit have to do with self deprecation? And what is the value of self deprecation? Isn't it better to be confident?

Also, why do Chinese families say directly to your face "You are getting fat!" Isn't that kind of rude?

Filipino families seem to side with their own, even when they are in the wrong, since right and wrong aren't that important here. But I guess it all depends case to case.

With American families, I think it depends on their values. The families that have strong feminist values tend to be more biased and opinionated and not as big on right and wrong, and always side with their own. But the families with conservative traditional values (e.g. The Waltons) will be more moralistic about it and lecture their own family members if they feel they are wrong.

One of my ex-girlfriend's families was so feminist, that when they referred to another couple, they always made sure to say the woman's name first, such as "Cathy and Jim", rather than "Jim and Cathy". Is that insane or what?!

I think it also depends on the type of dispute. In American families, if a family member has a dispute with their boyfriend or girlfriend, the family will tend to take the side of their own no matter what, and every gray subjective area will be sympathized with the family member. But if they commit a crime, then they will lecture the family member about being wrong.

[Winston]

Anyhow, can you explain why they do this, momopi? Is your family like this too? Are most Taiwanese or Chinese families you know like that too?

It's not an issue of right versus wrong, your parents simply don't want you to get into a conflict where hierarchy is not clearly defined. If it was a stranger, he may not receive the same consideration.

In my family, the elder would've simply commanded "stop the car here". Observe Chinese funerals where the eldest stand in front and younger to the back, same idea here. I get to tell my younger cousins what to do (within reason), and they don't get to do the same with me. However if you abuse your senior position, your family will simply stop associating with you.

Also, the elder is obligated to look after the younger's welfare (within reason). In your example, had I commanded my cousin to stop the car to buy snacks, I'd probably pay for their snacks too.

During the recent Southern California wild fire, I drove through the 57 freeway with fire on both sides to evacuate my younger cousin and his cat. Another cousin stayed with me because her apartment in Yorba Linda was inaccessible. I played host and paid for their upkeep for couple of days. They're not obligated to reimburse me.

My mother quit her job and moved back to Taiwan to take care of my grandmother. Her siblings chip in $$ to pay for her expenses. Her older sister gives a larger monetary contribution than the younger ones. There is no arguement or debate on who pays more or less.

W: But momopi, I'm not sure if you read the post clearly. This isn't about hierarchy. If it were, there would be no double standard. Even if I was the one driving a younger cousin, and this happened, my parents would still side with the cousin and say that I should have been more considerate of him.

And they do that with strangers too, not just family or friends. For example, one time in Seattle's Pike Place Market, I was waiting in line to get these delicious mini donuts. While we waited in line, the guy cooking the donuts saw that the wait was long, so he handed out some free donuts as snacks to those standing in line, but ONLY TO THE WOMEN, not to the men. Feeling insulted, I demanded that he give me the free donuts that he gave to the women when I reached the front of the line. When he did though, he added the 3 or 4 donuts to my bill. But I demanded that I get the extra donuts for free since those women, who were in front of me, did. He acted as though my request were out of line. But with my pride wounded, I persisted and wouldn't budge. Eventually, he gave in, but looked disgusted and weirded out at me. So, even though I won, we were both left with an angry negative feeling from the situation.

Surely, from a fairness standpoint, the donut guy was being unfair and rude. But was it within his right to do that? It depends on your point of view.

Nevertheless, when my parents heard about this, they told me that I should not have behaved that way and that the guy had a right to give free donuts to whoever he wanted. Of course, if I had been that donut guy, my parents probably would have said that I was wrong to do that.

You see the double standard now Momopi?

What would you guys have done in that donut situation? Would you have gotten mad too? Did I make a big deal out of a little thing? Maybe. But wasn't it within my right to be mad?

[Winston]

I agree with momopi.

Elders are to take care of the younger members of their family, so it's a matter of hierarchy rather than logic. In a situation where the hierarchy isn't well defined, like between my parents and their relatives (around the same age), then you'd have to be more self-deprecating than the other, to avoid a conflict.

Confucianism is a philosophy based on social stratification and how one social class should deal with another, and how there should be less conflict between two people. If you've ever studied Confucianism, then you'd have a different point of view of it. For example, my parents tell me to study hard to get a good job. What they say isn't without reason or logic. They worked hard to come to the US, raise their children, earn an income, and want their children to do good. Confucianism stresses education to such an extent that traditionally, before the 20th century, Chinese families had male children who studied for years to become a civil worker, eventually a government official, and lastly, a member of the imperial court.

If I had to take care of a younger relative (I only have a younger cousin, and some other 'younger' relatives), If any of them went out of line, my parents and their parents would blame me for not taking care of them. Makes sense since you're older and you're supposed to teach your younger relatives morals, ethics, and how to be good people. Since I was raised by my parents and an older sister in the US, I haven't had much contact with my other relatives in family.

In my last post, Chinese seldom split the bill. It's either all or nothing.

W: So in short, Chinese people are practical but not logical or fair, right?

What does Confucius think of free-thinking or nonconformity? Did he believe that an individual should not think for himself or use any skepticism or critical thinking? Did he condone blind obedience? What did he say about corruptness in government or authority? Or about fascism? Does he believe that people have no right to rebel or start a revolution, ever?

[wraith]

During the time when Confucius lived, China was a collection of warring states and also it was the era of many philosophies, similar to how Athens became the center of Greek philosophy at its height of power, where you have many philosophers discussing things. The philosophies that took root after the period were Confucianism, legalism, and taoism. Qin Shi Huang unified China under the philosophy of legalism. He persecuted anyone who disagreed with him, especially Confucians, which led to burning of Confucian texts and stoning and burying alive Confucian scholars. Eventually when the Han dynasty consolidated its power in China after the Chu-Han contention, an interregnum period after the fall of Qin, they adopted Confucianism.

So modern Chinese thought is a fusion of those three philosophies, with Confucianism being predominant among the three, as well as influences from Buddhism and other philosophies and religions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism

Regarding corruption:

Like some other political philosophies, Confucianism is reluctant to employ laws. In a society where relationships are considered more important than the laws themselves, if no other power forces government officers to take the common interest into consideration, corruption and nepotism may arise.

As lower-ranking government officers' salaries were often far lower than the minimum required to raise a family, while high-ranking officials (even though extremely rich and powerful) receive a salary of a value much lower than their self-perceived contribution (for example their incomes are often substantially less than a successful merchant), Chinese society was frequently affected by those problems. Even if some means to control and reduce corruption and nepotism have been successfully used in China, Confucianism is criticized for not providing such a means itself.

Another new idea, that of meritocracy, led to the introduction of the Imperial examination system in China. This system allowed anyone who passed an examination to become a government officer, a position which would bring wealth and honor to the whole family. During the Cultural Revolution, this system had been strongly criticized by the Chinese leadership. Literature at the time often depict scholars spending their entire life attempting to pass the Imperial examination, yet never succeeding.

The confucian idea of governing was an intermediate between legalism and taoism. Legalism stresses that laws should be enforced in an efficient manner, while taoism believes that people don't need laws. Legalism belives that people are inherently evil and should be controlled. Confucianism, believes that people are inherently good and should strive to cultivate their inherent good. Confucianism has a tendency to be corrupt. before the imperial exams, there were two different systems for choosing civil servants. One was to watch a student carefully, another was a recommendation from an official. By the time when the imperial exam system collapsed, many people who had money can buy their way into a civil service job.

Regarding Humanity:

Confucius was concerned with people's individual development, which he maintained took place within the context of human relationships. Ritual and filial piety are indeed the ways in which one should act towards others, but from an underlying attitude of humaneness. Confucius' concept of humaneness (Chinese: 仁; pinyin: rén) is probably best expressed in the Confucian version of the Ethic of reciprocity, or the Golden Rule: "What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others."

Rén also has a political dimension. If the ruler lacks rén, Confucianism holds, it will be difficult if not impossible for his subjects to behave humanely. Rén is the basis of Confucian political theory: it presupposes an autocratic ruler, exhorted to refrain from acting inhumanely towards his subjects. An inhumane ruler runs the risk of losing the "Mandate of Heaven", the right to rule. A ruler lacking such a mandate need not be obeyed. But a ruler who reigns humanely and takes care of the people is to be obeyed strictly, for the benevolence of his dominion shows that he has been mandated by heaven. Confucius himself had little to say on the will of the people, but his leading follower Mencius did state on one occasion that the people's opinion on certain weighty matters should be considered.

So in essence, people have the right to rebel against a ruler. The Chinese led by Zhu Yuanzhang overthrew the Mongols and established the Ming Dynasty, because 1) they saw the mongols as foreigners, 2) the mongols were becoming corrupt and in their minds, lost the right to rule over China, or the mandate of heaven. Even during the end of the Qing Dynasty, the Republic of China was established when they overthrew the last emperor of China.

Even though Confucianism stresses filial piety and loyalty, he knew that both of those ideas could potentially conflict with one another.

In Confucianism, an individual should think for himself. But it's in his best interest if things come out well in the long run.

If you're interested, read up about Chinese history. After all, history is one of the factors makes us what we are today. So don't assume that what you think about Chinese people is actually true.

The basic teachings of Confucianism stress the importance of education for moral development of the individual so that the state can be governed by moral virtue rather than by the use of coercive laws.

[momopi]

And they do that with strangers too, not just family or friends. For example, one time in Seattle's Pike Place Market, I was waiting in line to get these delicious mini donuts. While we waited in line, the guy cooking the donuts saw that the wait was long, so he handed out some free donuts as snacks to those standing in line, but ONLY TO THE WOMEN, not to the men. Feeling insulted, I demanded that he give me the free donuts that he gave to the women when I reached the front of the line. When he did though, he added the 3 or 4 donuts to my bill. But I demanded that I get the extra donuts for free since those women, who were in front of me, did. He acted as though my request were out of line. But with my pride wounded, I persisted and wouldn't budge. Eventually, he gave in, but looked disgusted and weirded out at me. So, even though I won, we were both left with an angry negative feeling from the situation.

Surely, from a fairness standpoint, the donut guy was being unfair and rude. But was it within his right to do that? It depends on your point of view.

Nevertheless, when my parents heard about this, they told me that I should not have behaved that way and that the guy had a right to give free donuts to whoever he wanted. Of course, if I had been that donut guy, my parents probably would have said that I was wrong to do that.

You see the double standard now Momopi?

What would you guys have done in that donut situation? Would you have gotten mad too? Did I make a big deal out of a little thing? Maybe. But wasn't it within my right to be mad?

* If you were with a young cousin or sibling, and he/she gets out of line, it's your responsibility to discipline him/her. You're required to be considerate (and sometimes provide for) of their needs, but that doesn't mean letting them go over your head.

* The owner of the doughnut shop is at liberty to give away freebies to whoever he/she wishes. As a customer, if you didn't get freebies, you didn't lose anything that you didn't pay for. You're not entitled to anything in the store that you didn't purchase.

However, if the store owner did something to upset you, you'd probably complain to at least 3 other people. As the consequence, the store will lose future sales and profits from it. Thus, the only real loser is the store and not you.

* Our society places a premium on women, children, and elderly. It's the man's job to love, protect, and provide for them. If you're on a sinking ship, women, children, and elderly will get priority to the life boat in an orderly fashion. This is the expected social norm for us, and going against it will earn the animosity of others. If you lived in a culture where it's "every man for himself", there would be a mob charging the life boat, trampling the weak and young under their feet. It's your choice what kind of society you wish to associate with and live in.

* In the doughnut shop scenario, the best action for the customer is to not complain about the freebies. If you felt his actions were overtly sexist, you're at liberty to make your opinion known to him, to take your business elsewhere, and/or complain to the corporate/franchise HQ. If the situation is serious enough, you can also consider taking legal actions.

If you're the store owner, the best action is to give a few freebies to the customer who complains, unless if there's a good reason why you don't want him/her to return (a customer that you don't want).

* Ask if your parents understand that being a gentleman doesn't mean being a valet/butler to the needs of others. You're not required to give any more or less consideration to the doughnut shop keeper, than to any other stranger.

[momopi]

W: So in short, Chinese people are practical but not logical or fair, right?

What does Confucius think of free-thinking or nonconformity? Did he believe that an individual should not think for himself or use any skepticism or critical thinking? Did he condone blind obedience? What did he say about corruptness in government or authority? Or about fascism? Does he believe that people have no right to rebel or start a revolution, ever?

http://afpc.asso.fr/wengu/wg/wengu.php?l=Daxue&s=1

Daxue I.4

The ancients who wished to illustrate illustrious virtue throughout the kingdom, first ordered well their own States. Wishing to order well their States, they first regulated their families. Wishing to regulate their families, they first cultivated their persons. Wishing to cultivate their persons, they first rectified their hearts. Wishing to rectify their hearts, they first sought to be sincere in their thoughts. Wishing to be sincere in their thoughts, they first extended to the utmost their knowledge. Such extension of knowledge lay in the investigation of things.

Daxue I.5

Things being investigated, knowledge became complete. Their knowledge being complete, their thoughts were sincere. Their thoughts being sincere, their hearts were then rectified. Their hearts being rectified, their persons were cultivated. Their persons being cultivated, their families were regulated. Their families being regulated, their States were rightly governed. Their States being rightly governed, the whole kingdom was made tranquil and happy.

=============================

To be sincere is to be free from deception.

[Winston]

As promised, here is the response from my dad to this incident:

"Dear Win,

I forgot all about that Tahoe incident. I don't think it was about double standard. We all have the tendency of considering the benefit of our friends and relatives more than ours. We tend to sacrifice a little of our own convenience, ideas or money for the people we like. When friends visit us, we would give them the best seats in the living room and take out our good stuff for them. When we go out to dinner or see a movie, we would ask what they like first and try to accommodate their like and need. I believe this kind of attitude is very common in many parts of the world and maybe the Asians are more obvious. I am sorry you were caught in the middle. I believe my thinking at that time was that hunger could wait. If you told me you had to go to the bathroom, I would stop right away.

In fact, you have the same kind of attitude yourself if you think hard enough. In many incidents, you accommondated to the people you like and put their interest before you in the past.

Love,
Dad"

"Dear Win,

Obviously, Taylor and Mr. Chen do not remember that incident. The reason you are the only one remember it was because you were the "victim" of that incident. I am sorry that you were caught in the middle of that incident. Maybe there were double standard involved. The fact is the so called double standard is very difficult to avoid especially in Asian family, like I said in my last mail."