https://www.reddit.com/r/AsianParentStories/comments/413u10/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)?

Deuteronomy 23:1

Maybe this isn't the best sub for this, but I was wanting the more unbiased historical context behind it because of how bizarre it is.

Previous weeks!

Please Be Aware: We expect everyone to read the rules and guidelines of this thread. Mods will remove questions which we deem to be too involved for the theme in place here. We will remove answers which don't include a source. These removals will be without notice. Please follow the rules.

Some questions people have just don't require depth. This thread is a recurring feature intended to provide a space for those simple, straight forward questions that are otherwise unsuited for the format of the subreddit.

Here are the ground rules:

• Top Level Posts should be questions in their own right.

• Questions should be clear and specific in the information that they are asking for.

• Questions which ask about broader concepts may be removed at the discretion of the Mod Team and redirected to post as a standalone question.

• We realize that in some cases, users may pose questions that they don't realize are more complicated than they think. In these cases, we will suggest reposting as a stand-alone question.

• Answers MUST be properly sourced to respectable literature. Unlike regular questions in the sub where sources are only required upon request, the lack of a source will result in removal of the answer.

• Academic secondary sources are prefered. Tertiary sources are acceptable if they are of academic rigor (such as a book from the 'Oxford Companion' series, or a reference work from an academic press).

• The only rule being relaxed here is with regard to depth, insofar as the anticipated questions are ones which do not require it. All other rules of the subreddit are in force.

Here is a link to the document in question: https://imgur.com/a/EdHzq I am specifically asking about the 5th from bottom line containing the name Narancich. It comes from Ancestry.com and is labeled as "Subject Index to Correspondence and Case Files of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1903-1952." It list a description of "Milk - Nunc Pro Tunc (List of)". I know the numbers are "INS Reference Number" but I don't know what that means.

Other info:

*I am confident that it is a relative of mine being referenced, as our surname is extremely uncommon, and it stayed relatively intact (+/- an 'h') as my ancestors came to the US speaking English.

*From family oral history, I know my g-gpa's brother, and was easily able to find his immigration paperwork. The brother also happened to come over with their father, so I also have his paperwork.

*I can find census data on him from immediately after he arrives, and great records thereafter (draft cards, census, town directories, etc), all showing he spoke English before he arrived, and little variation on name or b-day.

*I found his spouse's immigration paperwork, which gives his exact birthdate, and my grandfather's exact info. I am very confident that I've tracked the right person, but I can't find any documents showing his arrival.

*To make things even a step easier, the brothers were the end of the surname, so not only is in intact, but all documents with that name are related to me.

I know that I shouldn't expect perfect records, and not being able to find one person's papers is totally normal, but with all the factors I feel I could have a legit concern that my great grandfather was accused of murder about the time he came to America, and never made his residence legal...