Wow "Verrrrdy Intelestinque!" is that true? I guess it makes sense that this type of stuff would go on.I agree. Most of the differences between the traditional Chinese Arts are philosophical based on a variety of factors. One of them for example, is environmental, and explains the differences in philosophy between Northern and Southern Traditional styles.
But the more you examine the core, the more you see they are alike arriving at similar goals. Think of them as different kinds of trains running on different tracks, but all running properly principled with the same destination.
Keep in mind,
"Styles do not have principles. Styles have philosophical concepts or methodologies of training. But all styles (although many don't), should comply with the physical laws associated with most efficient human movement. They should not be subject to 'artistic' change for personal preferences or philosophy for the sake of a style." - Ron Chapél
Well sir, you have found a pefectly good example. Wing Chun is based on female anatomy, and the female knee inherently is turned inward from the wide pelvic bone, and is anatomically misaligned. This position is perfectly natural for a woman but not for most men.
Consider the inception of most 'styles' was based on a smaller window of viability as well. Many styles philosophically promote hyperextension and flexibility, for a 'style' of movement and execution that gave specific skills for a short period of time, in warriors who were not expected to live long, in a population that lived only slightly longer. The knee, hip, shoulder, etc joint problems created were not important. Most would die before they became major issues in ones quality of life. The conditioning of body parts by continued striking that ultimately created debilitating arthritic conditions are similar 'style mandates' that have no place or relevance today.
Ed Parker created a modern art if you will, sans the cultural accoutrements with a focus on self-defense. This had never been done before. Many of the cutural aspects of the arts have nothing to do with defending yourself, but rather promoting a cutural artisitic philosophy. Parker was in the process of distilling the physical aspects of the art from the artistic cultural mndates, to a practical application process that focused on self-defense from an American perspective. Many still hang onto cultural aspects while promoting strict self-defense. in many cases, these are incompatible. Thus many modern day martial artist are having significant joint problems, and hip replacement has now become commonplace. We as modern practitioners must learn to know the difference between 'art and style' mandates, over practicality.
Really good obs sir.
Sean