Compare that to boys who are supposed to be raised as more independent and tough. Is it possible that the way we raise boys versus girls is what's causing more boys to have trouble paying attention?
I don't know if "independence" and "toughness" capture what the author wants to talk about. There are cultures built around machismo in which male children are coddled and doted on by their mothers, where it is normal to be a "momma's boy" at home and a swaggering macho in the street. It's also possible to believe in the ideals of equality and interdependence in society at large while having zero emotional intimacy in the home.
That said, it's interesting that Japan has language for talking about this aspect of relationships. To me, it suggests a higher degree of uniformity in attachment styles compared to the United States, where talking about these kinds of relationships feels like a new social development associated with a progressive mentality. I think that historically in the United States, actual behavior at home has been all over the map. Different kids in the same classroom, with the same skin color, accent, and social class, are raised with dramatically different family relationships, often without realizing it until they are much older.
> It's also possible to believe in the ideals of equality and interdependence in society at large while having zero emotional intimacy in the home.
It's possible but may be harder. Home is like your base camp; you can have a crappy time in the outside world but home is the ultimate fallback and sanctuary. At least that's the ideal scenario. There's no doubt that growing up in a home that is broken or lacking warmth will affect you, and many studies have shown that. Take one: apparently if your parents are divorced, then the chance of your own divorcing will be higher [1], not to mention the other psychological impacts. Now imagine that divorce is normal - actually it is now - what impact does this have on society overall? It will be harder to measure, but it is real, just like those Japanese parents who raise their kids with love ultimately cultivates them into caring (amae context) people.
Sorry, my original statement wasn't clear. What I meant to say is that it's possible to grow up in a household where equality and interdependence are embraced as social ideals, but there is no emotional intimacy between members of the family, and children are discouraged from relying on others emotionally.
I don't know if "independence" and "toughness" capture what the author wants to talk about. There are cultures built around machismo in which male children are coddled and doted on by their mothers, where it is normal to be a "momma's boy" at home and a swaggering macho in the street. It's also possible to believe in the ideals of equality and interdependence in society at large while having zero emotional intimacy in the home.
That said, it's interesting that Japan has language for talking about this aspect of relationships. To me, it suggests a higher degree of uniformity in attachment styles compared to the United States, where talking about these kinds of relationships feels like a new social development associated with a progressive mentality. I think that historically in the United States, actual behavior at home has been all over the map. Different kids in the same classroom, with the same skin color, accent, and social class, are raised with dramatically different family relationships, often without realizing it until they are much older.