Hitman: Plan B

[WindKnight]

This is an AWESOME piece of exploitative action, something that the B-movie industry has been doing for ages (and has gotten very good at if I may add). All this holier than thou (see what I did there?) bullshit about 'sexualizing women' really... I'd like to hear the men complain about sexualized men stereotypes. I am just as incapable of living up to the hero warrior stereotype with a chest the size of a closet as most women are to living up to the thin/huge boobs ideal.

do you really need the concepts of a 'male power fantasy' and a 'male sexual fantasy' explained to you again, and why your argumaet really holds no water?

 

[TMM]

This is an AWESOME piece of exploitative action, something that the B-movie industry has been doing for ages (and has gotten very good at if I may add). All this holier than thou (see what I did there?) bullshit about 'sexualizing women' really... I'd like to hear the men complain about sexualized men stereotypes. I am just as incapable of living up to the hero warrior stereotype with a chest the size of a closet as most women are to living up to the thin/huge boobs ideal.

do you really need the concepts of a 'male power fantasy' and a 'male sexual fantasy' explained to you again, and why your argumaet really holds no water?

'fantasy' being the operative word here. That was kind of my point. It's a fantasy, I don't really know what a woman fantasy looks like on account of not being woman and I wouldn't dare speculate. But the notion that men are somehow less capable of separating fiction from fact than women are is somewhat insulting to me.

Surely the white knight of the dollar novels in the supermarket lead to unreasonable expectations from women on men?

 

[WindKnight]

This is an AWESOME piece of exploitative action, something that the B-movie industry has been doing for ages (and has gotten very good at if I may add). All this holier than thou (see what I did there?) bullshit about 'sexualizing women' really... I'd like to hear the men complain about sexualized men stereotypes. I am just as incapable of living up to the hero warrior stereotype with a chest the size of a closet as most women are to living up to the thin/huge boobs ideal.

do you really need the concepts of a 'male power fantasy' and a 'male sexual fantasy' explained to you again, and why your argumaet really holds no water?

'fantasy' being the operative word here. That was kind of my point. It's a fantasy, I don't really know what a woman fantasy looks like on account of not being woman and I wouldn't dare speculate. But the notion that men are somehow less capable of separating fiction from fact than women are is somewhat insulting to me.

Surely the white knight of the dollar novels in the supermarket lead to unreasonable expectations from women on men?

The point is, the 'buff guys' are meant to empower the players/reader. you are the beefy powerful killing dude. You are awesome guy. Its ego buffing.

The sexy chicks are for you too. They're for you to ogle, to have their ass and boobs stared at by you. They are not in any way female empowerment. this is why your argument comparing the two is fallacious and doesn't hold water.

 

[TMM]

The point is, the 'buff guys' are meant to empower the players/reader. you are the beefy powerful killing dude. You are awesome guy. Its ego buffing.

The sexy chicks are for you too. They're for you to ogle, to have their ass and boobs stared at by you. They are not in any way female empowerment. this is why your argument comparing the two is fallacious and doesn't hold water.

You are entirely correct, this trailer does not 'empower women' I do not believe it tries to either, what I believe it's trying to do is entertain a certain demographic and if I'm any indication they have succeeded. I thought it was awesome and I watched it again. If enjoying that makes me somehow a bad person in your eyes, then so be it.

I also like how you seem to suggest that being presented with a buff guy who can kick ass, who is very different from the player is ego buffing, if anything you're constantly reminded how not-awesome you are in real life. I personally don't think that way since I, like almost all of the world, knows that gears of war is a game which is not real.

If the popularity of "50 Shades of Grey" tells me anything, it's that fantasy for women involve being a naive college girl and becoming the submissive partner in a BDSM relationship with a rich, older man...

I had no idea, if that is truly the theme of the book and it is indeed very popular that would be a very interesting aspect of debates like this.

 

[Woodsey]

'Our bald protagonist has murdered people in strip clubs, brothels and parties filled with gimps, the series has always been sexually charged.'

The difference being, of course, that those were in strip clubs, brothels, and parties thrown by Hugh Hefner gone wrong (although that's not to say Hugh Hefner clearly hasn't gone wrong somewhere), not outside a motel in the pissing rain for no reason.

I've said before that the Absolution trailer seems to have come from someone who's seen those sexualised elements in Blood Money and missed the point. They're in there to be vulgar and twisted, to reflect 47's take on the world as well as to make playing a (literally) natural-born killer more palatable.

Blood Money did it for reasons (genuinely intelligent ones) other than trying to provide a 13-year-old with a wet-dream.

Anyway, good work on the strip - made me snort.

 

[TMM]

I'd just like to share a woman's perspective (my girlfriends) Got permission to post this, of course

(01:10:37 AM) ok, I'm a little turned on by the nuns.
(01:10:42 AM) I mean a lot turned on.



(02:01:33 AM) now, mind you, the fact that they're not just women but women dressed up as sexy s&m nuns does sort of make it slightly exploitative, but why the fuck not. I just watched Thor, and that was two straight hours of me objectifying men.
(02:01:44 AM) because damn, yum

(02:04:01 AM) I still think "BEEFCAKE OMG!" every time I see the guy who played thor.
(02:04:27 AM) but yeah, there were copious amounts of drool and me objectifying men during that movie.
(02:04:40 AM) I'd watch the avengers even if it was crap, just for the eyecandy.
(02:05:42 AM) so yeah, it's not like it doesn't go both ways. it's just that when it's done to please men it carries all sorts of uncomfortable historical nastyness with it, so we're sensitive.

 

[Woodsey]

So it's misogynistic to kill women but mowing down legions of men in every game is ok? Fuck that person from IGN.

It's quite apparent that's not what's being said, even from the one paragraph quote Grey picked out - which you can't have missed if you were responding to there being an IGN article.

 

[Negatempest]

Wait. Is IGN saying that hitting women in any circumstance is wrong or that violence with no meaning behind it is wrong? Either way, the guy must of hated Mortal Kombat.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

While it isn't "the worst thing to happen to women" in a game, I do think it does bring up a bit of an issue in games. Namely the whole; if we're going to have them kill women we might as well let them see their underwear first.

That's not completely bad on its own, but I doubt the guys 47 is going to kill are going to strip before they die.

Possibly not, but they're certainly going to strip afterwards if this is anything like any other Hitman game.

I don't know, the dude's killed enough people, male and female, that weren't in practical combat gear before now that I just can't see the outfits themselves as the issue they would be in the context of another game.

 

[foolish snails]

*sigh*
*swig*
squaring "profits" would actually decrease the actual profits. If you change the equation so (cheesecake+murder)²=profits, the profits would be much greater than the cheesecake and murder put into the equation, which is what I think you meant.

Unless you didn't mean that, in which case that is A LOT of cake and killing, especially for a game this size.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

While it isn't "the worst thing to happen to women" in a game, I do think it does bring up a bit of an issue in games. Namely the whole; if we're going to have them kill women we might as well let them see their underwear first.

That's not completely bad on its own, but I doubt the guys 47 is going to kill are going to strip before they die.

Possibly not, but they're certainly going to strip afterwards if this is anything like any other Hitman game.

I don't know, the dude's killed enough people, male and female, that weren't in practical combat gear before now that I just can't see the outfits themselves as the issue they would be in the context of another game.

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

 

[theultimateend]

So it's misogynistic to kill women but mowing down legions of men in every game is ok? Fuck that person from IGN.

Good comic as usual.

There are only 2 obvious visual options for genders, it's only cool to beat or kill one of them.

Similarly there are quite a few races, but there is only one you can kill without it being racist. The only exception to this being when some particular terrorist or war group happens to all belong to a visually similar region of the world.

But more often than not, if you aren't killing white men you are some kind of hateful person.

"But dude, here are 20 examples to the contrary." Yes, I imagine it is difficult to find the exceptions in every game where the other 998 times you kill folks its white dudes .

I don't mind, it doesn't make my life different, but I find it a bit silly.

*Snip*

Everything in this post about martial arts and realistic outfits I am for.

Doesn't really change much in games but I sometimes find that G Strings break my immersion in combat.

I'm sorta liberal about sexuality since I think we put sexuality and nudity too high on a pedestal, but it does come across as silly at the very least.

For starters, they can get caught on things - your enemy could use them as a handhold. You're literally wearing nets, plenty of grab spots. Plus, there is simply no reason to wear them. There is no benefit. Eh don't provide warmth, or make you more slippery, or anything practical.

I never knew this, I figured they provided some kind of heat retention. I guess it makes sense that they don't given the design. Now I feel stupid.

 

[Animyr]

The incredible graphics and the fact that the Nuns actually land several hits on 47 (ie it's a fight, not a slaughter) made me like the trailer. The stripper costumes were a bit much though. Who thought they should equip their assassin team with platform shoes and makeup?

 

[OtherSideofSky]

While it isn't "the worst thing to happen to women" in a game, I do think it does bring up a bit of an issue in games. Namely the whole; if we're going to have them kill women we might as well let them see their underwear first.

That's not completely bad on its own, but I doubt the guys 47 is going to kill are going to strip before they die.

Possibly not, but they're certainly going to strip afterwards if this is anything like any other Hitman game.

I don't know, the dude's killed enough people, male and female, that weren't in practical combat gear before now that I just can't see the outfits themselves as the issue they would be in the context of another game.

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

Oh, there's no question the trailer is really stupid and pretty sleazily exploitative, I was just pointing out that 47 is famous for stripping his male enemies down to their underwear and putting on their clothes as a disguise, a mechanic which has been the butt of many jokes over the years.

The scenario portrayed in the trailer is totally out of keeping with what previous Hitman games were actually about (they're more like puzzle games about murder than action games) and the previous games would actually have docked you quite a lot of points for the actions on display here. As someone who liked the previous games, I won't be buying this one if this trailer represents it at all accurately.

I think a bigger reason I'm less sensitive to this stuff is cultural. I'm currently living in Japan and only about half of the media I consume is in English, so I'm used to male characters being sexualized to attract female viewers being as prevalent as the reverse. The English speaking world has a serious problem with pretending that female sexuality doesn't exist, an attitude maintained by groups who benefit from using that idea to shame male sexuality. Think about it: You can find a wall of pornography produced by and for women in just about any supermarket in the US, but when was the last time you heard anyone acknowledge it in a debate on pornography? Similarly, sexualized portrayals of men are consistently branded homoerotic as opposed to simply erotic, but have you ever heard anyone describe an image of lesbians in those terms? The groups who claim to be fighting this attitude are going nowhere fast because most of them have internalized the passive female/active male dichotomy into their "progressive" positions, and are thus only capable of attacking superficial manifestations of the real problem.

Honestly, I don't see that sort of thing going away until more women abandon antiquated strains of socialized sex-negativism (the modern one-sided sex-negativity which often masquerades as "sex-positive" is still sex-negativism) and publicly embrace their own sexual agency.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

Oh, there's no question the trailer is really stupid and pretty sleazily exploitative, I was just pointing out that 47 is famous for stripping his male enemies down to their underwear and putting on their clothes as a disguise, a mechanic which has been the butt of many jokes over the years.

The scenario portrayed in the trailer is totally out of keeping with what previous Hitman games were actually about (they're more like puzzle games about murder than action games) and the previous games would actually have docked you quite a lot of points for the actions on display here. As someone who liked the previous games, I won't be buying this one if this trailer represents it at all accurately.

I think a bigger reason I'm less sensitive to this stuff is cultural. I'm currently living in Japan and only about half of the media I consume is in English, so I'm used to male characters being sexualized to attract female viewers being as prevalent as the reverse. The English speaking world has a serious problem with pretending that female sexuality doesn't exist, an attitude maintained by groups who benefit from using that idea to shame male sexuality. Think about it: You can find a wall of pornography produced by and for women in just about any supermarket in the US, but when was the last time you heard anyone acknowledge it in a debate on pornography? Similarly, sexualized portrayals of men are consistently branded homoerotic as opposed to simply erotic, but have you ever heard anyone describe an image of lesbians in those terms? The groups who claim to be fighting this attitude are going nowhere fast because most of them have internalized the passive female/active male dichotomy into their "progressive" positions, and are thus only capable of attacking superficial manifestations of the real problem.

Honestly, I don't see that sort of thing going away until more women abandon antiquated strains of socialized sex-negativism (the modern one-sided sex-negativity which often masquerades as "sex-positive" is still sex-negativism) and publicly embrace their own sexual agency.

Well I think it may take a bit more than just a lot of women changing their minds about sex to change marketing trends. I mean women have already "changed their minds about sex" for a long time by now, and people know it. As you said; women are already making their own porn. I think the bigger issue is how nobody wants to change the "main target" in marketing even though it isn't (and for a long while hasn't been) just men looking to buy junk that isn't really needed. By that I mean even though things have and are continuing to change, people are content to keep the marketing the way it is, because hey, it still works.

Also, I did know about 47's habit of taking his enemies clothes to use as a disguise. I was just afraid to attempt to spell disguise. (I hate spelling)

Hmmm....Actually maybe that's why they sent girl assassins dressed like that.

 

[Erttheking]

Ahhahahahaha...ah, it's funny cuz the women in the new Hitman trailer don't wear very much clothes.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

That may be why I don't "get it". I haven't had the pleasure to play the Hitman games myself, so I am probably more "sensitive" to the wired stuff, but can even a veteran Hitman player explain the reasons for all that?

What I mean is; 1.The ladies are assassins, why draw attention to yourself especially when your target knows (or at least believes) you're coming after him? I don't just mean the "sexy" outfits either. I mean, when was the last time you saw even just 4 young nuns all in habits?

2.From what I can tell their plan was to just blow him up before they were even seen by him, so who was the show for? What would they have done if he did die, or just ran off insted of killing them? They would just look silly.

All that said, Hitman isn't the most serious game, and yes I know this is all just for good (albeit not very clean) fun.

Captcha: baked in a pie

....Plan C?

Oh, there's no question the trailer is really stupid and pretty sleazily exploitative, I was just pointing out that 47 is famous for stripping his male enemies down to their underwear and putting on their clothes as a disguise, a mechanic which has been the butt of many jokes over the years.

The scenario portrayed in the trailer is totally out of keeping with what previous Hitman games were actually about (they're more like puzzle games about murder than action games) and the previous games would actually have docked you quite a lot of points for the actions on display here. As someone who liked the previous games, I won't be buying this one if this trailer represents it at all accurately.

I think a bigger reason I'm less sensitive to this stuff is cultural. I'm currently living in Japan and only about half of the media I consume is in English, so I'm used to male characters being sexualized to attract female viewers being as prevalent as the reverse. The English speaking world has a serious problem with pretending that female sexuality doesn't exist, an attitude maintained by groups who benefit from using that idea to shame male sexuality. Think about it: You can find a wall of pornography produced by and for women in just about any supermarket in the US, but when was the last time you heard anyone acknowledge it in a debate on pornography? Similarly, sexualized portrayals of men are consistently branded homoerotic as opposed to simply erotic, but have you ever heard anyone describe an image of lesbians in those terms? The groups who claim to be fighting this attitude are going nowhere fast because most of them have internalized the passive female/active male dichotomy into their "progressive" positions, and are thus only capable of attacking superficial manifestations of the real problem.

Honestly, I don't see that sort of thing going away until more women abandon antiquated strains of socialized sex-negativism (the modern one-sided sex-negativity which often masquerades as "sex-positive" is still sex-negativism) and publicly embrace their own sexual agency.

Well I think it may take a bit more than just a lot of women changing their minds about sex to change marketing trends. I mean women have already "changed their minds about sex" for a long time by now, and people know it. As you said; women are already making their own porn. I think the bigger issue is how nobody wants to change the "main target" in marketing even though it isn't (and for a long while hasn't been) just men looking to buy junk that isn't really needed. By that I mean even though things have and are continuing to change, people are content to keep the marketing the way it is, because hey, it still works.

Also, I did know about 47's habit of taking his enemies clothes to use as a disguise. I was just afraid to attempt to spell disguise. (I hate spelling)

Hmmm....Actually maybe that's why they sent girl assassins dressed like that.

It's not so much a case of "already" as it is one of "since widespread literacy and the emergence of entertainment media as a viable economic product". The problem is that no one wants to call pornography or sexual imagery targeted at women what they are. The result is that there are still a lot of men who believe most women are uninterested in such things and a lot of women who feel ashamed of enjoying them.

An interesting note about marketing is that, in the US, 65% of marketers are women and women account for around 70% of discretionary spending. Certain markets are slower than others, but the idea that no one is thinking of selling these things to women is flat out wrong. Even the motion picture industry, which often takes the brunt of criticism in these cases, has been producing major properties and entertainers appealing pretty much exclusively to women's sexual fantasies going back to at least the fifties. The problem is, when it comes time to talk about this stuff, everyone forgets any of that stuff ever existed. This stuff needs to be acknowledged before any real progress can be made, and women are really the only ones in a position to do that and make it stick. Of course, open debate on sexuality in the media consists almost entirely of criticizing and shaming people for it, so it's pretty easy to see why most women wouldn't want to put themselves out there for that.

I think the romantics have to take the blame for a lot of this shit. They're the ones who came forced the passive, pure, almost asexual ideal of femininity down everyone's throats. I don't think that's really been good for anyone, except the writers that made their careers on it.

I think that in this situation Occam's Razor tells us that the reason they're dressed like that is probably that the people making the trailer came up with a boring action concept and decided to throw in women in what are either stripper outfits or Halloween costumes (the two appear to be basically indistinguishable at this point) to distract people from everything else that's wrong with the trailer and get more attention. It lacks the strange almost-sincerity of a genuine exploitation film and while it doesn't make me think that the people making it hate women, it does make me think that they want to sell they're game to 14 year olds.

 

[rbstewart7263]

Kill a man: regular day at work.
Kill a women: WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON?! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!?!?!?!

Why is this still a thing? =|

Also, great comic. I would love to play a game where mostly naked women with nipple tassels wielding uzis jump out of cakes and try to kill me.

Its a matter of context and empowerment/dis-empowerment really. A woman portrayed as a vicious gangland boss who has people killed on a whim? I don't think people will bat an eyelid at her being assassinated. And I don't have a problem fighting female enemies portrayed as capable fighters.

Fighting women who's defining characteristic is fetish gear? Thats a little uncomfortable. Why couldn't they be dressed in, say, mafia-esque black suits and shades? And that poster linked in the blurb, of the beautiful woman in a sexy outfit, and a 'pretty little headshot' combined with the subtitle of the advert is really not good.

I disagree with the idea that something as simple as having women in lingerie fighting is necessarily sexist thats being a bit too nitpicky. Ive noticed a growing trend of feminists requiring that all media portray women in a manner of which they like. "her shit covered up, her a smart and capable fighter" The idea that anything less than the most badass of chicks with no flaws as being sexist is unfair in itself and its important to note that they gave 47 quite the run for his money; They almost got him. As far far as there wardrobe ill agree not practical but then it doesnt escape the absurdity that the franchise is known for.

Had 47 dispatched them easily and then tusseled with say one grizzly faced man who was his match then this arguement would have merit.

Also of note its said that a man wearing a tuxedo to a woman is the same as lingerie to a man so the context of sexuality was rather equal throughout.

 

[The Youth Counselor]

I'll repeat what I wrote before:

Most gamers aren't outraged over the gratuitous sex and violence (although many are upset over their mixing.)


Sure, the Hitman franchise has always had gratuitous sexualization.

However when it presented itself, it was proper and logical in setting and scenario. 47 had to eliminate someone who happens to run a brothel, frequent a stripclub, be a sexual sadist, attend a vegas show etc?

When 47 faced off against previous sexy vixens their attire made sense. In Silent Assassin Charlie Sidjan happened to be a horny rich prick who hired scantily clad women to guard him. In Blood Money's Dance with the Devil mission Eve and Vaana disguised themselves as showgirls to get close to 47.

Then there's this.

These women are walking in broad daylight in nun uniforms (which isn?t even an inconspicuous disguise, the point is to not stand out) before stripping down to the very tactical and practical choice of fetish gear and high heels. Then they blow up and shoot up the motel in broad daylight, in full view out in the open!

This is something I would expect from the likes of a Japanese developer or fighting and fantasy games. Hitman may have always had campy over the top moments but it?s always had one foot on the ground with realism or believability. This just makes no damn sense.

This was nothing more than an excuse to render and showcase hyper sexualized females and show them strangled, punched, stabbed. and blown away with big phallic guns. This isn't mature, just something to titillate immature teenage boys.

 

[rbstewart7263]

I'll repeat what I wrote before:

Most gamers aren't outraged over the gratuitous sex and violence (although many are upset over their mixing.)


Sure, the Hitman franchise has always had gratuitous sexualization.

However when it presented itself, it was proper and logical in setting and scenario. 47 had to eliminate someone who happens to run a brothel, frequent a stripclub, be a sexual sadist, attend a vegas show etc?

When 47 faced off against previous sexy vixens their attire made sense. In Silent Assassin Charlie Sidjan happened to be a horny rich prick who hired scantily clad women to guard him. In Blood Money's Dance with the Devil mission Eve and Vaana disguised themselves as showgirls to get close to 47.

Then there's this.

These women are walking in broad daylight in nun uniforms (which isn?t even an inconspicuous disguise, the point is to not stand out) before stripping down to the very tactical and practical choice of fetish gear and high heels. Then they blow up and shoot up the motel in broad daylight, in full view out in the open!

This is something I would expect from the likes of a Japanese developer or fighting and fantasy games. Hitman may have always had campy over the top moments but it?s always had one foot on the ground with realism or believability. This just makes no damn sense.

This was nothing more than an excuse to render and showcase hyper sexualized females and show them strangled, punched, stabbed. and blown away with big phallic guns. This isn't mature, just something to titillate immature teenage boys.

Its important to note that this is a trailer meant to grab someones attention. were it a commercial it would be interrupting my otherwise stellar evening of watching breaking bad and when the action is broken the commercial is at the disadvantage of getting my attention and getting me to buy the product. Yes the context of the previous games was more justified by a backstory(not hard to come up with if you want to you know give reason to charlie sidjans guards being in fetish gear)

Also of note were 47 a woman taking out six men in tuxedos would this have garnered the same unnecessary amount of analysis?
I think not I think it would probably be heralded for games "breaking stereotypes,empowering women"etc etc

Its as though feminists will only feel empowerment when men in general whether it be the media they engage in or the society they are surrounded by to completely disempower men altogether. To have posters, games, magazines featuring a man beaten and broken by a confident, realistically proportioned woman.


(Of note Women who are naturally thicker or curvacious seem to represent "male chauvinism" whilst women with even shoulders/ arm width; boobs and ass not too big but never too small represents the ideal physique for a woman. This pisses me off, Ive plenty of friends with a wonderful healthy physique that they inherited naturally through there genetics. To imply that there size d boobs and healthy midsections makes them incapable of being smart, of defending themselves??? To that I withhold my words of anger at those with such small minds.)