While there may or may not be an element of Nihonjinron to this idea in general, I think people are intentionally taking parts of the article out of context as justification to dismiss it outright.

I mean, here is the quote that is getting everybody upset:

> “It’s unique in Japan because one word takes care of so many phenomena, behaviours and interactions”, from a toddler crying to be picked up to a wife begging her husband for an expensive gift, “but amae exists everywhere beyond Japan and people can identify it in their lives, even if they didn’t know what to call it.”

The interviewee clearly says this is a global concept, which goes against any notion of Nihonjinron. The claim is that only Japan has a term for this specific, nuanced behavior, which is a debatable issue.

Anybody that has ever spent time in an intimate environment in Japan (e.g., at home with family) will likely notice amae and its prevalence in close relationships, no matter the age or gender of the people involved. The purpose of the article, as far as I can tell, is not to claim that this behavior is unique to Japanese people, but rather to emphasize its importance in the culture at many different levels.