Why I Feel Entrepreneurial Parents Expecting Their Children to be EXACTLY Like Them Will Just Bring DISAPPOINTMENT

I was thinking about mistakes that Chinese parents (or Asian parents) tend to make. This isn't an argument against the need to establish obedience, submission, set standards of excellence, and the like. However, it can be too much. There's a big difference between authoritarian parenting and authoritative parenting. This is the chart where we can see a big difference. 

Obviously, being demanding and supportive is the best way. It's because if you demand good results--you need to be supportive to get those good results. Unfortunately, such may not be the case in some parenting. Some want their children to graduate with honors, but are unsupportive or just force them. That's why some do well (for a while), and then they begin to falter later in life. It's not like those who did well in school because their parents are supportive and gave them only the right amount of pressure (i.e., not demanding honors and only getting mad when grades drop low). I feel that the late John Gokongwei Jr. did well in school and in real life because of an authoritative environment. I felt John Jr.'s parents were reasonably strict people. It's pretty much spanking your children when they're naughty, but don't spank them if they get an A-. Spank your children if they get low scores, but not if they don't enter the honor roll. Yet, in old Chinese parenting, an A- (which I'd be proud of) is as good as an F, which is just stupid. 

I think it's a real cliche when parents say, "When I was your age, I was already got into the business. A few years later, I had already gotten married. I don't know what I did wrong." It would be stupid to say that if you got married early but ended in a failed marriage. Either that marriage ended in a legal separation, annulment (declaring it void due to irreconcilable differences), or even divorce. The standards have changed throughout the years. Textbooks from last year or years ago are already outdated. Today, I've decided to look at academic textbooks, and the new information is overwhelming. It's like studying civics and culture back in the 1990s is different from civics and culture in the 2020s. Back in my days, the late Corazon "Cory" Cojuangco-Aquino was still among the living ex-presidents. Later, Cory died of cancer in 2010. In 2021, her son, Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" C. Aquino, died of renal disease secondary to diabetes. In short, the list of ex-presidents kept getting longer and longer. Now, Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. is the incoming 17th president. Think about the long list of former presidents, including the still-living ones and the dead ones. Scientific information is generated daily. It's like how you have the physics book during the time of Archimedes (known as the father of calculus) was later updated by Isaac Newton's Newtonian calculus. Calculus, which studies the rates of change, gets broader in its application. Calculus, which originated from ancient engineering, is used in modern engineering. Besides, today's news is tomorrow's history. That's why history classes require current events to be studied--not just data in the book. Those are just a few examples of ever-increasing standards.

Try analyzing the ages people got married in the past. One's grandparents or great-grandparents may have married as teenagers or in their early 20s. The new constitution no longer allows teenagers to get married. People got married earlier in the past due to short life expectancy. People probably didn't prioritize education that much. Back then, it was still K+10 when people had to take so many last-minute subjects. A good example is how I felt economics was taught as a last-minute subject. I feel K+12 needs to stay so people have economics subjects in both middle school and high school. I may have gotten better grades in economics in college. However, I still felt stupid because now I didn't know about its application until college. I feel like my high school economics teacher had no choice but to rush things into our heads. I'm surprised I was even able to grasp college economics at the University of San Carlos (USC) during my college days. The extension into K+12 means it's almost impossible to brag, "When I was just 20, I was already into business."

I think another thing worth noting is the difficulty of the schools. I heard it's very easy to enter the honor roll in mediocre schools. I don't see any reason to brag about becoming an honor student in a school where the standard is below average. It would be better (at times) to graduate from a high-standard school without honors. Parents who say, "Why is it that my child isn't an honor student and I was." Times have changed with the standards. As mentioned, new information is generated daily. We just can't rely on the information from decades ago to be our textbooks today. We always need to upgrade our textbooks. In short, the standards from decades ago are lower compared to today. We just can't keep expecting our children to be like us. It's because they'll be faced with information that's new to both parents and children. 

What matters more is continuous learning. We need to stop making unrealistic expectations of children becoming exactly like their parents. Some people will always be better in one area than the other. Sometimes, hidden faults from past generations may manifest in this generation. It might be possible from a long line of mathematicians--somebody who struggles more with math will be born. It might be because of maternal or paternal genetic defects. Sometimes, the strength of the lineage wasn't from a patriarch but from a matriarch. A woman contributes as much genetic material as a man ever will. It's like how a mathematical intelligence may be passed by the mother instead of the father. Maybe for some generations, better mathematics skills were passed down thanks to the matriarch. However, the patriarch's weakness in mathematics may soon manifest in a future generation. So, a fine family of mathematicians may get a person not-so-good in mathematics thanks to the patriarch. 

I think parents really need to start thinking of creating uniquely successful children, not to be like them. Can they be sure if all their ancestors were always A+ students? Family glory is often short-lived, whether we like it or not. There may be hidden defects in your family tree without knowing it. It might be a centuries-old defect that decided to re-manifest today. I'm even inclined to believe that some rich men today may have come from a lineage of bums. Maybe some rich men today may have stories of their parents being gamblers, grandparents being gamblers, and may have come from a long line of people who mishandled money. One day, somebody emerges to break the cycle by having smart money habits. Some people tend to hide their shameful lineage and try to make it look like, "We're always a fine family of businessmen." However, that will only discourage children, especially when they discover their bad ancestors or if it manifests in later generations. 

Just think that parental experience can never be inherited by children--only the fruits of experience. The one who founded the business knew the inside out. The one who founded the business from rags to riches would know what it means to live paycheck to paycheck as a low-level employee. The one who founded the business from rags to riches would know what it means to live in ridicule. The problem comes when the one who founded it raises the children, attempting to spare them from the struggle or not let them know about it. I guess it's very easy to think that relatives should be alike. On the contrary, this kind of thinking has caused dynasties to collapse when parents just assume that learning is automatic. Learning isn't automatic--it's based on experience. Nobody becomes a five-star chef or a high-ranking entrepreneur overnight. The Tan brothers of Jollibee had to struggle before Jollibee became what it is nationwide, and to sought ways to survive the international market. Nobody learns how to handle money if you just hand it over to them. Sometimes, you need to teach them how to budget the money rather than just hand them money to budget. It's like a parent could say, "Stop, just stop buying what you don't need!" if they see their children buying too many of their wants. Restricting allowance is one thing. Teaching them to manage a restricted allowance is another. 

It's time to break the cycle. We can never always expect our children to be like us. Maybe it's a good thing because we would have a bunch of clones instead of unique people. It would be better if they find their own productive passion rather than forcing them into ridiculous tasks. Pressure them to be productive but not to be what they can't become. Obviously, a person not inclined to higher maths isn't fit for computer and engineering courses. I wanted to be a doctor in my early years, but I discovered I'm afraid of blood. I wanted to take information technology, but my math skills weren't that good. Sometimes, deviations in the gene pool are bound to happen because of hidden flaws from generations past. Who says culture is static? Just think that Chinese culture has evolved over time. Yulin's barbaric animal cruelty festival has been shunned by many other Chinese. Chinese foot-folding for women (a very painful and barbaric practice) is a thing of the past. Chinese women already know their rights. Chinese men no longer take multiple wives since polygyny became illegal until the present. A lot of changes in Chinese culture happened. Besides, Chinese culture today has absorbed several foreign influences or has merged with them. I'm enjoying milk tea because of the influence the British have had on the Chinese. I'm enjoying Chinese technology because of its foreign influence on Chinese culture. We need to think of this middle road--the path where authority respects creativity and creativity respects authority.