Why do asian (Korea, China...

Why do asian (Korea, China, Japan) cultures historically speaking and today seem to have a preference for women that act useless and babylike?

it's moe

They didn't, historically speaking, and they don't today.

Anime isn't history, nor documentary. It's design to appeal to horny singles.

>this is your brain on anime

Have you seen anime lately? Their women are usually more competent than the men.

that's anime

Like it was mentioned before, the individuals that are attracted to that type of women probably have lower self esteem and see women like that as an ideal as it makes them feel less worthless.

I know nothing about China or Korea, bit Japan does have a weird infatalizing of women especially when they are acting in more women like roles. It wasn't the main focus of my studies, but the language in Japan shows a large ammount of sexual dimorphism and this tends to lead towards making women more "cute" seemingly more than most languages.

Better question is why does the modern west glorify the ugly, brutish and grotesque while East Asia glorifies the cute, beautiful and attractive? Is it the niggerization of Western society?

*binds ur feet

What? Girls like that are objectively cute . Why wouldn't you want that ?

maybe because he doesn't want a retard as a girlfriend.

>foot binding is widespread in modern east Asia
did you try to make a retarded point somewhere
>inb4 the last 90+ year olds with binded feet are shown to me as proof it’s still practiced

I think it's related to why the nips always make the best girl lose and always have worst girl win, shit taste nips

t.uggo 250 pound amerilard "female"

...

Not necessarily the useless part (especially for wives) but cute women are cute.

Western women are far more useless than Eastern women.

>post about personality
>start talking about fat vs thin

"cute" is personality plus appearance.

Mainland China is not like modern feminine Korea/Japan/Republic of China

I named that file fatties vs thin long ago for another thread, but really it's about Western roasties butthurt over superior Asian females. Not so much fat vs thin, although that's the veneer.

Despite all the hype about muh independence, that's sadly true.

That might be correct for peasants who are too busy trying to eke out a living to give a crap about cosmetics but not true otherwise. When I went to Beijing in the summer the majority of women carried around parasols to keep out the sunlight.

That's the natural role of women.

Beijing, and other first-tier cities, account for 4% of China’s population.

Half of Chinese are rural poor farmers. Which is exactly what I stated.

It's more of a matter of income rather than culture. People need a steady supply of food before they can act civilized.

but the beauty IDEAL is the same

Peasants try to stay beautiful even within the microcosm of their villages. You are woefully out of touch.

Yes.

That's because you have no culture.

Its natural to prefer masculine male and feminine female
The west used to have the same preference, at peast until the 50s

Want women act like women doesn't equal to act useless and babylike.

>feminine = useless and dumb

You can be warrior but still a doll.

No.

feminine = useful and attractive as female

There's literally places in Japan where you can go to have pretend dates with school girls and certain kinds of basically softcore child pornography (not drawn) are tolerated, unless that has changed very recently.

>Why do asian (Korea, China, Japan) cultures historically speaking and today seem to have a preference for women that act useless and babylike?

They didn't?

In a Confucian Gentleman's household a woman was expected to run it. She can't do that by being a babyish cunt.

Indeed! Only true gentleman with culture understand this.

Some roasty mechanic is useful to me? Bah.

>a preference for women that act useless and babylike

...the Lolita, the Virgin Princess, the Noble's Puerile Daughter, the Chaste Maiden, the Fiesty Jewess, the Sexually-unaware Alien, the Manic Pixie, the modern sexualized teen -- do you recognize none of the archetypes?

Most of human history has the typical male fantasy nailed down to a pretty girl in her biological prime being "taught" or "tamed" by a man's knowledge of the sensual. Partially because biology/social standing, and partially because men revere loyalty -- and the only way to have a loyal woman is to essentially get her when she's young; otherwise, women are naturally too clever to be locked down by male values.

Besides the biological imperative, there's the dominance thing. Women will be loyal to a male they deem dominant, insofar as he's the most dominant she's ever experienced and felt deep emotions for. The instant she realizes a better option exists, she takes it.

Men dislike facing the reality of clever, competent women, or that they're not more gifted or naturally better. Rather than power or control or some retarded shit, men want certainty: in feminine beauty, in feminine youth, in their own hierarchic standing, and in a continued trust/loyalty. Those ideals have been pushed onto women for millennia, and it doesn't take a whole lifetime for people to accept what's forced or expected of them, let alone as long as it has been reinforced.

>The funniest part though, is that it's not men who pushed the ideals onto women, it was women. Men had the ideals and originally acknowledged them as fantasies, women pushed them onto women to give the dominant ones an upper hand or natural advantage (by not buying into that shit).
That fire's still burning.

>Most of human history has the typical male fantasy nailed down to a pretty girl in her biological prime being "taught" or "tamed" by a man's knowledge of the sensual.
I study history and never see this.

Females were basically heads of household you baboon. The man would labor away from home or share the labor in tge fields while the woman handled childrearing and homemaking AND the finances. It's often still like tgis in Japan. As it should be IMHO