What is sex? Ontologically? Spiritually? Humanly?

That doesn’t make you a master.

Wing Chun does have few things correct, but its problem is extremely unrealistic blocking and parrying techniques.

First you neutralize your opponents then you crush them.

Wing Chun does have few things correct, but its problem is extremely unrealistic blocking and parrying techniques.

I'm sure Master Wong would appreciate it if you would tell him how to do it right.

I'm sure Master Wong would appreciate it if you would tell him how to do it right.

the correct way is used in krav maga, where you block and dodge at same time, and then counter attack.

I dont need to say that wing chun fighters lose often in rings because their order of actions is either too complicated or incomplete. they usually lack dodging in their training, and dodging is one of most crucial skills in modern fighting, because dodging is more effective than blocking. Wing Chun focuses entirely on blocking or parrying, which is unrealistic because no opponent will throw just one punch. But entire wing chun is focused on one punch of opponent, and once a chain of punches happen, their technique becomes flawed because they lack dodging which is more effective against chain attacks.

Wing Chun fighters often struggle in modern ring fighting (MMA/boxing) because the style's close-quarter, trapping-focused techniques are difficult to apply against fighters skilled in distancing, diverse kicking, and ground grappling

. While effective in tight spaces or, as some argue, in specific street contexts, they often lose in competitive, open-ring environments. 

Key reasons for poor performance in the ring:

1. Lack of Grappling/Groundwork: Wing Chun does not emphasize ground fighting, making practitioners vulnerable once taken down.
2. Distance Management: The style is optimized for close-range (trapping) rather than the long-to-mid range kicking/punching distance common in the ring.
3. Misunderstood Techniques: "Chain punching" is often wrongly applied as a weak flurry, whereas true, effective Wing Chun requires intense, precise pressure, and many practitioners train with improper, low-contact methods that fail against high-impact strikers.
4. Rules Restriction: Many traditional, potentially damaging Wing Chun techniques (e.g., eye strikes, joint locks) are banned in competitive sports, limiting their toolkit.
5. Sparring Methods: Lack of full-contact, sparring-based training in many traditional schools makes it difficult for practitioners to handle the speed and power of experienced, full-contact fighters.

https://youtu.be/d8X-yKdiX6g?si=nb32Q-1lUPie-I-0

Thank you Master SatanLucy.

I admit that I dont know a lot about martial arts, I just go by what usually works in reality statistically. Because lets face it, those joint locks look good when in controlled scenario. In reality, Wing Chun never ranked high anywhere, not in MMA and not in any serious fighter sport.

You can look at top 1000 fighters in any universal fighting sport, and you wont find any wing chun fighters there.

Wing Chun produced Bruce Lee. That’s all the promotion it needed.

I admit that I dont know a lot about martial arts, I just go by what usually works in reality statistically. Because lets face it, those joint locks look good when in controlled scenario. In reality, Wing Chun never ranked high anywhere, not in MMA and not in any serious fighter sport.

You can look at top 1000 fighters in any universal fighting sport, and you wont find any wing chun fighters there.

Wing Chun doesn't matter, I'm sure you can teach all of the martial arts.

Bruce Lee didn't use Wing Chun. He invented his own martial arts which is, to no surprise, nothing like wing Chun.

Wing Chun doesn't matter, I'm sure you can teach all of the martial arts

With chatgpt and statistical probability method, yes I can.

For example, martial arts invented by Bruce Lee, Jet Kun Do, uses straight lead punch to make sure punch reaches target in quickest possible path - straight. Same for kicks. Straight kicks are faster than round kicks, and thus can even intercept them and counter attack.

So yes, Bruce Lee did have good ideas, especially about not sticking to rigid rules, but be like water, where the only limitation is to have no limitations.

Wing Chun doesn't matter, I'm sure you can teach all of the martial arts

With chatgpt and statistical probability method, yes I can.

For example, martial arts invented by Bruce Lee, Jet Kun Do, uses straight lead punch to make sure punch reaches target in quickest possible path - straight. Same for kicks. Straight kicks are faster than round kicks, and thus can even intercept them and counter attack.

So yes, Bruce Lee did have good ideas, especially about not sticking to rigid rules, but be like water, where the only limitation is to have no limitations.

Thank you Master Satanlucy.

Bruce Lee didn’t use Wing Chun. He invented his own martial arts which is, to no surprise, nothing like Wing Chun.

Get your facts straight. Don’t just guess your answers.

Bruce Lee extensively used and trained in Wing Chun, which served as the foundational martial art for his fighting style. He studied under the renowned Wing Chun grandmaster Ip Man in Hong Kong starting at age 13 for several years before moving to the United States. 

Wing Chun doesn't matter, I'm sure you can teach all of the martial arts

With chatgpt and statistical probability method, yes I can.

For example, martial arts invented by Bruce Lee, Jet Kun Do, uses straight lead punch to make sure punch reaches target in quickest possible path - straight. Same for kicks. Straight kicks are faster than round kicks, and thus can even intercept them and counter attack.

So yes, Bruce Lee did have good ideas, especially about not sticking to rigid rules, but be like water, where the only limitation is to have no limitations.

If Bruce Lee were still alive, you could teach him how to do martial arts.

Bruce Lee made martial arts famous and preserved the safety of the Chinese people spreading fear that all Chinese knew martial arts.

If Bruce Lee were still alive, you could teach him how to do martial arts.

Of course, thanks to statistical probability study method, I can teach anyone anything.

Another useful method is goal oriented study method, which uses forward reasoning and backward reasoning commonly used in chess engines.

Backward reasoning is basically starting with goal, and then working backwards to see what achieves goal step by step backwards.

Backward reasoning method:

P1. We must achieve this goal

P2. A achieves this goal

P3. B achieves A

P4. C achieves B

C. We must achieve C to achieve B to achieve A to achieve goal

Forward reasoning method:

P1. C achieves B

P2. B achieves A

P3. A achieves goal

C. We must achieve C to achieve goal

No mention of arm or foot movement the basis of martial arts.

Of course, thanks to statistical probability study method, I can teach anyone anything.

I get it, you are all knowing, you can teach anyone anything.

Except for you can't teach yourself how to meet a woman, get a job, or have a life.

But hey, other than that, you are an enlightened being.

I get it, you are all knowing, you can teach anyone anything.

I wouldn't say that I am all knowing. I just know a lot more than other people do.

Except for you can't teach yourself how to meet a woman, get a job, or have a life.

This is a classical example of "didn't do = can't do" fallacy.

Also, I logically have no need for a job or a woman. Women have no desirable qualities outside their looks.

But hey, other than that, you are an enlightened being

Thank you. You see, even you are correct sometimes.

You still found a way to compliment him. That takes talent.

And so what conclusions have we reached concerning sex?

To you sex is sperm production. That would imply masturbation.

Sex is either procreation or recreation and for a good old Canadian Catholic convert girl you sure are obsessed with me masturbating.

You made your obsession public. Masturbation goes against religion. But by saying No to religion you left it to your hands to do the right thing.

Sex is not either procreation and recreation. Unless you think rape, molestation and prostitution don't exist. Which might be the case here.

Rape, molestation and prostitution are simply examples of the variety of methodologies employed in order to achieve procreational satisfaction.

All come under the general umbrella of recreational sex, wherein the objective of the organism is to overthink and override internal messaging, yet still achieve procreational satisfaction.

Of course, overthink also facilitates accompanying fantasy simulations...Which is a factor in all aspects of human function...Such is human imagination.

You're denying the base realities of human physiology and function Poly, and have a tendency to employ your imaginary fantasies, somehow as tangible explanations.

Rape, molestation and prostitution are also categorised under various other subject headings, such as morality, ethicality, and legality for example....And here, you are deliberately conflating various aspects of human function both demonstrably biological and conceptual...The aim of which is not to establish facts, but rather to denigrate and accuse.

Rape, molestation and rape are the dark side of sex and leads to perversions.

Rape, molestation and prostitution are the result of overthink, which is one aspect of intellectual primates data management system.

As is the metaphysical construct of a dark and perverse state.

Overthink cannot switch off base messaging and currently there is no social system in place that seeks to biologically manage base function.

So, every mature unit has an innate need to procreate and we rely upon conditioned overthink to manage such needs relative to overthought human expectations.

Overthink is fantasying about aliens as sexual partners.