Saturday Audience Participation
Today's questions about tattoos: Prole or now drifting upwards in class? Do you have a tattoo? Why did you get one? Why do people in general get one? Anyone else find the notion of the body as a canvas somewhat odd? What do you think of people who get a tattoo? If you don't like tattoos in general, are there specific kinds that you do actually like? Impressed by tattoo artwork? Did you ever consider getting one but didn't go through with it? Is there any place on one's body where a tattoo is more acceptable? Any reason behind the tattoo that would make it more acceptable? What do you think of people absolutely covered in tattoos?
101 comments:
The only tattoo that ever made me smile belongs to a Jewish fashion designer from Brazil who's got blank parallel lines inked onto the palm of his left hand, for the purpose of taking notes. Almost all others revulse or sadden me, from the perforated lines along the neck with the words "cut here" inked below (seen on two different persons in my area, to the faded smurf on the shoulder of a thirty-something woman on the commuter train, a blue blob that reminded me of bread mold.
As a non-inked person who loves wholesome female flesh, it just looks like more herd-think on the distaff side. There's narcissism involved, but it might also be that in a society lacking in meaningful rituals (initiation and suchlike), self-scarification fills the void for some.
but it might also be that in a society lacking in meaningful rituals (initiation and suchlike), self-scarification fills the void for some.
Great point and I think you might be on to something as many kids in their late teens get tattoos as a proxy for this sort of thing.
I mentioned the fading away of initiation rituals in the context of childhood before:
http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2011/07/eleven-year-old-gay-rights-activist.html
Tattoos are not only unbelievably, disgustingly ugly, but a terrific marker of stupidity. How do you think that will look when you're somebody's grandma? It's a sad sight to see a beautiful young woman who has marred herself with a tattoo, but at least you know she's too dumb to marry without having to make the effort to get to know her.
I have serveral most from Bangkok they are all classic Asian style. I think they record my journeys from all over the World. They are for me and most people never realize I have any at all.
MuayTyson
Tattoos are utterly stupid. They look awful if you ever gain or lose weight. People's interests and personalities change often - what is meaningful to you as a 20yo may not be so meaningful at 30 or 40. And there's the health concerns involved - if you're not careful where you have your tattoos done, you could get infections.
tattoos are dumb. most especially on women. people get them for one reason only: because they are mandated by popculture. whatever reason they may give (it is meaningful to me), this is the real reason.
I have several tattoos from 21-24 years ago, only two professionally done. I agree with the initiatory comment. Mine were from my youth, being homeless and mixed up, with a gang of like-minded individuals. I can honestly say every one of my tattoos means something. While there are a couple that I would like to remove because of what they are associated with the rest represent real experiences outside of mainstream society that are a part of my life, memories, etc. and the experiences during those times taught me well. For someone like myself when average kids started tattooing themselves in the 90's and it went mainstream we viewed it as kind of blasphemous. Until that time tattoos were usually reserved for outsiders and were a way of identifying our selves as well as further committing to an anti-mainstream approach to life. Nowadays to see these tatted kids who have invested thousands of dollars and have huge holes in their ears and lips just makes me laugh. though it may come from a sense of alienation (which most kids feel at some point) I cannot help but see it as a phase which many will regret.
While I find tatoos repellent, it is obvious that they are moving upclass.
My new neighbor, a successful, upper middle class businessman has a multicolor western scene on his right shoulder and a nondescript navy blue something or other on his other shoulder.
I always thought tattoos were only for sailors and prostitutes.
sykes.1's example of his neighbor is not evidence that tattoos are moving upwards in class, but that his neighbor is not actually as upper middle class as he would like us to believe.
Social class is only tangentially related to monetary wealth; it's more about education and values. The "upper middle class businessman" maybe be financially successful, but his tattoo is evidence of decadence and the destruction of middle class values (prudence, in this case). Traditionally, only low class people who aren't capable of prudence and upper class people who can afford not to be prudent would do something like getting a tattoo. Now, becuase we live in a decadent society with a "middle class" that is far wealthier in material terms that emperors of the past, we see this kind of behavior drifting from the margins of society to the middle.
Tattoo removal is expensive, much more so than getting them put on. Insurance doesn't cover it, since it's an elective cosmetic procedure. You pay the dermatologist or plastic surgeon up front - big bucks. Of course, most people who get tattoos are so stupid that they never think about this.
I think they record my journeys from all over the World.
This concept always struck me as odd - deliberately scarring one's body to represent an experience. I guess I can understand it since it's analogous to physical scars (I have a few), but it's still a little strange.
I recall wanting to get a tattoo when I was around 16-19. I remember some of the ideas - thank God I never went through with it.
The worst tattoo: either Chinese lettering or a tribal tattoo.
It's proles and prole wannabes. Quite disgusting, I agree. But then the last few decades of culture include quite a bit of middle class aping the lower classes so what's new, eh?
I hate tattoos. I always think, gee, how will that look when they are 80? They just seem so stupid. Very prole. The two friends I have that have tattoos are prole. I is like a prole id badge. Nasty. Body mutilation is what my grandmother called it.
It is a strange concept and it only seems to have gotten popular since around 95. I don't remember people having them before then.
That was right about when "Barb Wire" came out, a sort of B movie that showed off Pam Anderson's body and of course the tatoo thing.
It might also have to do with "street cred" and wanting to look tough, something that became popular in the 90s as well.
I was talking to an upper class old man and he said he'd never hire someone with all those tats. It's low class and low impulse control.
I think the real charm of it sometimes is degradation; you see a woman who might have beautiful skin but now she's covered in this ink, like she's damaged or something.
Tattoos these days are like other symptoms of low class, they help people self identify so that the rest of us know to avoid them.
Prole and 100% low class, even if they're the 'discreet' kind.
We're seeing more and more of them these days because so many stars these days hail from the ghetto.
LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! I'M UNIQUE!!! I'M DIFFERENT! I'M JUST AS UNIQUE AS ALL THE OTHER UNIQUE PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST AS DIFFERENT AS ME!
God, but I'm tired of that.
Yes, I suppose an argument could be made that it's pathetic. But that makes it no less tiresome.
Body mutilation is what my grandmother called it.
I actually think there's much worse (though less common) types of "body mutilation."
I was in Whole Foods a few weeks ago (yea so what, they have great meat and salads) and the guy whose arms had no visible skin wasn't even the worst. The worst: the cashier with two enormous holes in her ears.
The people with excessive amounts of facial and body piercings really disgust me.
I can understand tattoos a little bit, but that body mutilation stuff is disgusting.
The negative comments here say more about the individuals commenting than the topic at hand.
I agree that most people who have gotten tattooed post 1995 are doing it because it's fashionable, but tattooing is one of the most ancient artistic traditions among all human populations, including Europeans.
I do find tattoos on women to be unattractive, but I have 4 that were done many years before the wave of pop-cult tattooing began in the mid 90's.
I did it for myself, I certainly don't discuss them with others, and in the winter no one would know I have them.
And I know plenty of middle aged ex military who love their old tats... they actually start to look a bit spooky as they sink into the skin with advanced age.
As far as some of the ultra proper prissy comments, please remove the stick from your ass before talking about a subject whose history you are completely unaware of.
And if you are European, rest assured our ancestors were heavily painted and tattooed for many thousands of years.
One of the most beautiful attributes of human beings to me is glowing clear skin. This radiates health and vitality. It is evolutionarily encouraged by mate selection. Many of the symptoms of disease manifest themselves in the skin such as smallpox and bubonic plaque. These people are seen as unhealthy and a poor choice for mates.
When I see a tattoo, I have a negative kneejerk reaction that this person is diseased. It has always been a mystery to me why some people view it as attractive body art.
Tatoos are a perfect social signaling device. Two rules for tatoos: 1) the more tatoos you have, the lower class you are, and 2) the closer to your sexual organs they are, the more of a slut you are.
The funniest thing is the way that blacks go crazy over tattoos, but their skin is often so dark that you really can't make out the designs anyway.
But the most "tatted" NBA player is white - Chris Andersen of the Nuggets.
http://katchop.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/c-anderson-cpy.jpg
The only people who I accept tattoos from are servicemen who've seen combat that their whole unit wants to comemorate. Everyone else is a poser - especially those guys with the concertina wire tats around their biceps. I see grandmothers and dorks with tattoss now adays and I think it's ridiculous. I can't stand men wearing earrings, either.
One of my students told me about a family friend (truck driver) who got a Chinese character tattoo on his left forearm. He was told that it meant "Big Stud".
He went into the local Chinese restaurant one day, and all of the Chinese started laughing. Imagine his surprise when they told him that the correct translation of the characters was "Fat Man"...you see, he is quite overweight.
"tattoos are dumb. most especially on women. people get them for one reason only: because they are mandated by popculture. whatever reason they may give (it is meaningful to me), this is the real reason."
As usual, Anonymous nails it. It's a brave act for a young woman to not get tatted, because it could mean exclusion from the highest echelons of slutdom at the most important place and time on Earth: high school.
I was always told to never get a tat because it would make it difficult to get a job. But I notice tats on everyone under the age of 40 now, regardless of profession.
prawnster
One said:
"This concept always struck me as odd - deliberately scarring one's body to represent an experience. I guess I can understand it since it's analogous to physical scars (I have a few), but it's still a little strange."
Yeah. What's wrong with photos? Or a journal? Or just remembering and junk?
On women, tattoos are all-liability, no-asset. No exceptions.
On men, they can be cool if congruent with his backstor, like working class childhood, military or maritime service, or his ethnic icon.
But "random" tats such as armbands or Oriental writing are idiotic.
Tattoos jumped the shark when Ozzy Osbourne started complaining about them.
"You all look like pirates!"
Caleo burped:
"As far as some of the ultra proper prissy comments, please remove the stick from your ass before talking about a subject whose history you are completely unaware of.
And if you are European, rest assured our ancestors were heavily painted and tattooed for many thousands of years."
I don't care how long people have been mutilating their bodies, European or not -- tats are fuck ugly. Unless you have third-degree burns you're trying to cover up, they can't possibly improve on the beauty of skin.
prawnster
I don't like tattoos.
I don't have any myself, and I think that any young woman out there who would let some stranger stick a needle into her repeatedly would easily let other strangers stick other disease ridden unmentionables into her repeatedly as well, and should therefore be avoided, and shunned from polite, civilized society.
People can say that tattoos are moving upwards class all they want, it doesn't make it true. Tattoos are for low-class gutter scum. Always have been, always will be. The women who tattoo the names of their child(ren) over their heart/chest are some of the worst IMNSHO.
Think of it this way: Would you plaster bumper stickers on a brand new Mercedes-Benz?
I'm probably high middle class wage slave. (See Paul Fussell's "Class" or anything written by HalfSigma). Tattoos really are a class marker. I've never personally seen someone at my class or higher with a tat.
I see this trend of people getting tattoos as a mix of prole drift and herd mentality.
Interesting that you brought up tattoos as a topic. I found the cutest tattoo online. It is very delicate and feminine, and represented my husband and I & our kids.
I showed my kids and they all had a fit. I think my teen daughter actually yelled at me. LOL My husband thought it was sexy and he hates all tattoos. It was cool that he was for it.
Then I started looking at all the moms out there with tattoos and I didn't really like it. We live in an area where everyone has tattoos and piercings galore. It's very acceptable.
I decided against it because I wanted to be a little rebellious and different, but then I realized if I did it I'd be like everyone else. So I decided to not get a tattoo and be original with my unmarked skin.
Tattoos signal low class. They fall into the same category as bumperstickers and belly button rings as desperate attempts to convey a message, but since they are such lazy and unsophisticated methods of telling someone about yourself, they are low class. I touched on this recently in my post "Tackiness."
While large, prominent tattoos are hideous and send the additional signal, "I could care less about social norms," small, discrete tattoos are just as bad, because they indicate the person is actually trying to do it in a classy way, which is a double fail -- failing for being low class, and failing at trying to look higher class.
Personally, I despise most tattoos and would never consider one myself (I do have pierced ears, which I do not regret). I'm not certain, however, that they automatically signal "lower class." I live in what is stereotyped as an upper-class, heavily conservative area (in reality it's also heavily culturally enriched and changing rapidly) and most of the Whites under 45 have tattoos. Even the most conservatively dressed women have something tattooed on their ankles. Large, multiple, visible tattoos on women is more of a lower-class indicator, however. My hairdresser has a number of them.
My older son got tattooed once he was 18 and we couldn't do anything about it. Part of it has to do with his joining the military and his evolving sense of self (from super-smart geek to super-smart and tough soldier). We've taken to bribing him to prevent more (if you promise not to get another tattoo for "x" time period, we'll buy you "y" in celebration of "z" - usually the bribe consists of a firearm he can't afford himself). We're grateful he's not into the piercings so many other men of his age get; his roommate (from a very high-income family) has no tattoos but does have huge holes in his ears, and wears incredibly strange clothes (tartan plaid long, baggy shorts with various zippers and buckles - sort of 80s punk style on steroids).
In contrast to the commenter who despises the fairly common barbed-wire tattoo on a well-defined bicep, I find that one alone relatively modest and fairly tolerable, provided the muscular development is legitimate.
I hate when people get tattoos in prominent places, as a means of commemorating some event, but when you ask about it, are met with a huffy "I don't want to talk about it. It's personal. I just got this tattoo for me".
If you don't want people asking about it, then don't tattoo it on your arm, asshole! This has happened more than once.
I can't stand tattoos or piercings that are not in the ears. Soon, those without tattoos or tacky piercings will be the "odd" ones.
I have no tattoos, despite having been in the Navy for a time. About half the people I know have tattoos, most of them either proles or "rebellious" college kids trying to look badass. I personally think they look silly and juvenile.
I think there is some sort of prole drift, where middle-class and even a few foolish upper-middle-class people take up some of the formerly prole traits. Tattooing might be one of those prole drift things. If enough of today's tatted college kids enter the upper middles or even the uppers, will we start seeing tattoos on our Presidential candidates some day?
I've seen tattoos on higher-class people but typically they have the money to remove tattoos and all of those surgeries. So they have a tattoo and they take it out as a habit.
Even the most conservatively dressed women have something tattooed on their ankles.
I guess since liberal now means nearly naked, showing underwear or wearing an outfit that looks like a bikini a tight small blouse and a short-mini skirt is supposedly "conservative". *Shivers*
The negative comments here say more about the individuals commenting than the topic at hand.
No Caleo. We're saying something about the topic at hand.
sykes.1's example of his neighbor is not evidence that tattoos are moving upwards in class, but that his neighbor is not actually as upper middle class as he would like us to believe.
Saint Louis upper-class isn't just about education. It's about wealth as well.
I have two very small tattoos, both of which I regret. I'll have them removed at some point, I think.
At this point, the only way to be "original" is to forgo ink. At least, that's the way it seems when I look around. Everybody and their dog has tattoos all over themselves.
I think tattooing is a lot like spraying graffiti on the walls of a church (never mind the probable origins of that idea; it still rings true - anyone think the Greeks would have approved of ink?)
How do you think that will look when you're somebody's grandma?
That's another thing that's always forefront in my mind; what's grandad going to look like covered in faded, dated, sagging, wrinkly ink?
Think of it this way: Would you plaster bumper stickers on a brand new Mercedes-Benz?
Awesome metaphor. That's my new one-liner on tattoos.
What a bunch of squares and pussies you have here One.
Yes, conspicuous forearm and neck tattoos are, shall we say gratuitous. On the other hand I've tattooed my entire back and I enjoy going shirtless in the summer and having street-type NAMS (Vietnamese as well - this is the Bay Area after all) show more respect than they would otherwise. Not to mention I catch the neighborhood MILFS curiously eye-balling the ink at the swim-club.
(I'll add: graduate degree, professional, happily married with children, six-figure salary)
If any commenter missed it, Theodore Dalryple made what I believe is a hilarious observation.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/5_4_oh_to_be.html
It Hurts, Therefore I Am
Theodore Dalrymple
The cause of criminality among the white population of England is perfectly obvious to any reasonably observant person, though criminologists have yet to notice it. This cause is the tattooing of the skin.
A slow-acting virus, like that of scrapie in sheep, is introduced into the human body via the tattooing needle and makes its way to the brain, where within a few years it causes the afflicted to steal cars, burgle houses, and assault people.
I first formulated my viral theory of criminality when I noticed that at least nine out of ten white English prisoners are tattooed, more than three or four times the proportion in the general population. The statistical association of crime with tattooing is stronger, I feel certain, than between crime and any other single factor, with the possible exception of smoking. Virtually all English criminals are smokers, a fact that sociologists have also unaccountably overlooked.
(see more at link)
What a bunch of squares and pussies you have here One.
Squares? Who the hell uses that term nowadays? Did you time-travel straight from the 1950s, Daddy-O?
Things were easier back in the 80's when having a tramp stamp meant something for women. (it meant that they were a tramp) When you saw it, you knew that the chick was loose and you could react accordingly.
Nowadays almost all women have them, with a lot of them getting them on Spring Break during college. Tramp stamps have gotten pretty blase now.
I think it's pretty low-class in general. Although unfortunately, probably more than half of the women to take interest in me have had at least one (and a large portion have been *really* into the "art"). I can't think of what I would want plastered on my body already. A Georgia Tech logo? Nah. I think most people with a large number of visible tattoos just want attention, and it's something that a large portion of society views as "cool," at this point.
I would venture to say most people with an abundance of tattoos are pretty liberal, and find it difficult to reconcile themselves to my political beliefs. Small, hidden ones aren't that bad, but once you get into the overt ones like half-sleeves and calves covered in ink, you have to wonder what's going on upstairs.
And I think it's funny when people mention how they're saving up for a tattoo, but they're not sure what they're going to get? Hello? That is hilarious to me.
Those are my basic thoughts on tattoos. It's been bugging me lately, as women with lame tattoos have been interested in me.
I like tattoos as long as they are somewhat discreet and not something stupid looking like a tramp stamp. If they were good enough for my ancestors, they are good enough for me. And yes, I have one tattoo and am upper middle class; it's a symbol of my heritage and pride. Most people have a positive reaction to it.
In my experience, the "tramp stamp" = quick to have sex & high number of sex partners.
Question: Would you marry a woman with a tramp stamp? Or even have sex with?
What is up with the corporate culture of Whole Foods that it employs such individuals for work?
"(I'll add: graduate degree, professional, happily married with children, six-figure salary)"
And guess what, Chris? You're still a low-class idiot.
http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/demello-dalrymple-2647
Check out Dalrymple on tattoos. He says it all.
What is up with the corporate culture of Whole Foods that it employs such individuals for work?
How many job applicants for cashier or shelf-stocker DON'T have tatts today?
"In my experience, the "tramp stamp" = quick to have sex & high number of sex partners."
or it means that they want to project that in order to be cooooool. which is more pathetic? to be a real loser, or to wish you were?
"The people with excessive amounts of facial and body piercings really disgust me."
Yes, it disgusts me, too. However, when the person grows up and out of their idiot phase, he can just take out the stud or ring and needn't spend $$$ on plastic surgery. Even huge ear holes are pretty easy to correct. Tattoos on the other hand, what a nightmare to remove.
"I was always told to never get a tat because it would make it difficult to get a job. But I notice tats on everyone under the age of 40 now, regardless of profession."
Huh? I have never known a doctor, lawyer, engineer, actuary, accountant, etc, with a tattoo. And I know lots of them socially.
As for tattooed whites, I think it is like white illegitimacy. Back in the day middle and upper class American whites had bigger families and held their own in the war for numerical supremacy. The bad habits of the lower classes had more impact on their fitness. Nowadays that has changed completely. Responsible folks have very few kids and they subsidize the increase of the lower classes. It is just like having more 3rd world people, you get more 3rd world behavior. Now we have more lower class whites, so we have more lower class behavior. No surprise, just evidence.
You can take the girl out of the slum, but you can't take the slum out of the girl. It is genetic.
The only thing that really works is to out breed them to the point of desperate resource scarcity and well, survival of the fittest. That is how we got all of the advances before. We have extended the cycle, but there will eventually come a time when push comes to shove. Get your kids and grandkids ready for it.
I hate tattoos. It seems to me that they started showing up in large numbers around the time, (mid-90's) when it started to become clear that the chances of achieving a decent middle-class income were slipping away. You may remember that the period 1990-1993 was when companies perfected the art of downsizing (i.e. even before offshoring) and doing more with fewer people. So my suspicion is that tattoing is a form of class warfare - the economically lost generation's way of pissing off the people whom they can't join in the economy. Put another way, most people are smart enough to know that having visible tattoos can cost you heavily in career prospects. But if you're convinced those prospects don't exist anyway, you're looking for a way to say F-you. Incidentally, to the poster who says that for women the location of the tattoo can indicate relative whore status, there's a great scene in the 1984 Clint Eastwood movie "Tightrope." A gorgeous 19-year old whore gets a tattoo just above her clit, then Clint takes her in the bum.
Leviticus 19:28 all the way.
I have seven of them, all gotten during my twenties. They aren't the worst tattoos in the world -- most of them are solid black designs based on plants, animals, machines, etc -- but I'd prefer it if I didn't have any of them. The aesthetics appealed to me then when I was connected to certain transgressive subcultures. Now, I hate said subcultures, and I hate having to look at tattoos everywhere I go in this town. I didn't have any reason for getting them beyond appreciating the imagery. Now, I appreciate it far less.
Sometimes when I'm talking to a pretty girl, I'll say, "I really like the fact that you have no tattoos -- don't ever get any." And she'll say, "But YOU have tattoos." I respond, "Yeah, and I like dresses on women, even though I don't wear one myself!"
In this day and age, I don't think tattoos are an indicator of high time preference or impulsiveness. As ugly as they are, the fad has been fully embraced by sector of educated middle class that has has transgressive lifestyle preferences. On a daily basis, I see people who who appear affluent and successful by all other visible metrics other than their tattoos. I'm doing well myself -- I make 50K a year, have lots of money saved, etc., although I'm not normal in all respects. I do experience a certain amount of alienation from mainstream society and am somewhat reclusive. I don't know if tattoos serve as a marker for unconventional personality traits or not.
It seems to have come as a surprise to some of the tattooed commenters here that people think tattoos look stupid. Well, it's never too late to learn, I guess.
I suppose that this would come as news to people born into one social class but who have managed to move up into higher circles. There aren't many people who actually ever do move up, though.
I honestly do not have an opinion on tattoos other than that they're a turn-off for me. Tattoos in many cultures are even associated with their criminal underclasses.
Tattoos' growing popularity isn't a sign they're going upscale, it's a sign society is going into the gutter.
And it's amusing to see some of the tattooed commenters defending their tattoos as part of a thousands-of-years-old tradition. Among the ancients, tattoos were the province of barbarian riff-raff. Civilized ancients like the Greeks, Romans, and Chinese almost universally looked down on them.
Anyone who's tired of women with tattoos should go to Russia or Ukraine. While post-Soviet culture is very prole in a lot of ways, tattoos and body piercings are almost non-existent over there -- esp. among women.
Prole and stupid.
Tattoos are goofy, and they'll be passe soon enough. It won't be long -- quicker than most 23-year-olds are capable of mentally conceiving, certainly -- before they serve as the mark of old people.
A tattoo eventually will look the way a ponytail today looks on a 50-year-old guy: a sign not just of unhipness, but of egregious, pathetic unhipness. For the upcoming generation, the one that will avoid tattooing because they'll be moving along to the next trendy whatever, a tattoo will scream "old person who grew up in the '90s/'00s."
And yes, as Mark Presco points out above, a tattoo is perceived by the brain as a skin blemish and thus a sign of ill health. It can downgrade even the most gorgeous of women.
Finally, the idea that one should permanently chronicle some ephemeral thought about one's "identity" or "journey" at some arbitrary moment in life, by enlisting another human being to etch his representation of it onto one's body... I don't know. It just seems to reflect a deep lack of self-awareness.
Tattoos' growing popularity isn't a sign they're going upscale, it's a sign society is going into the gutter.
Totally.
"I was in Whole Foods a few weeks ago (yea so what, they have great meat and salads)"
Don't forget to mention rambutans, kombucha, and Brie. Anyway, I also don't understand how people could mutilate themselves enough to have enormous ear holes.
I agree with most here in that tattoos are de rigueur for the under and working clases. Some people associate high class with being rich or high income, and only that judging from what I frequently read. However, this is easy to refute when one mentions certain professional athletes and actors and remind people of their low class mannerisms. Someone from the inner-city who becomes a multimillionaire is still from the inner-city.
I got one in my Bukowski days living in San Francisco circa 1991. It is on my upper right bicep. And is f'n stupid. I hate it now and remind my kids never, ever to get one; they are a sign of low class.
Now, I'm a professional, married (thank God my wife who I met in SF never got tatted though everyone we knew in 91 was), kids, good income...etc.
Tats are definitely low class and are absolutely horrible on women.
Agree the piercings are hideous also.
MDR
I might consider a machine readable barcode of my SSN on my butt.
The best, though somewhat rare, tattoo example is lower-beta guys, usually with little musculature, getting a tattoo to look tougher. It just really doesn't work at all and is usually just comical.
I can think of one friend who I would consider middle class who got a tattoo. He has an Ivy degree, though he comes from a higher prole family (venerable prole, not white trash prole). He has two, one of which is an Irish tattoo because he's from an Irish family.
On the one hand, its weird that such an amazingly well-read and intelligent and educated guy got a tattoo. But it also sort of made sense because he's kind of hipster SWPL, the really intellectual, reading all day kind of hipster leaning SWPL.
You guys are funny - obviously none of you work in any 'creative field' where nobody really cares and/or associates these things with any sort of intellectual correlation.
I'm personally covered with tattoos - starting maybe 25 years ago up till the present. I have a capital 'C' at the beginning of my job title, have a degree from an elite university, and read this blog. So what does this make me?
If one of you panty-waists said this BS to my face, I don't care how much time you spend in the gym, you would be nursing a fat lip.
Morons.
The european "history" of tattoos isnt very involved really. Tattoos were used to mark slaves as property and to mark soldiers in thier units. These 2 groups were the LOWEST class you could be in ancient rome, and people thought nothing of marking them up for thier own convenience. The tradition continues today with soldiers, but we got rid of slavery for the most part, so why you would want to mark yourself as propery is beyond me. This is why tattoos are considered LOW class even now.
As an aside, best tattoo I ever saw was a young lady that had tattooed the Words "fuck off" using the Star Wars Alphabet on her calves. (From the computer screens within the film.)
I am geek enough to recognize the characters, but I had to look them up to verify her translation.
What if you have no short-term memory, and you need to get yourself tattooed in order to remember stuff?
Or what if you are an SWPL type who gets one of those mustache-on-the-finger tats?
http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2009/02/10/121-funny-or-ironic-tattoos/
@Mack
Your response tells volumes..
@Kaz, it speaks volumes about how the real world perceives something contrary to your narrow views - and that you wouldn't have the balls to say jack to my face.
Coward.
Bring the movies.
If one of you panty-waists said this BS to my face, I don't care how much time you spend in the gym, you would be nursing a fat lip.
So, you're an Ivy-educated corporate bigwig who'd freak out and beat up anyone who said he thought your tattoos were tacky and prolish? Do you really have so little self-control and self-esteem that you'd commit assault and battery over something so trivial? Or are you just trolling for lulz? Please say the latter.
Bring the movies.
OMG don't AMOG me, bro! Do we really have to whip out dicks? Cuz I'm warning ya!
You want a sword fight or something?
Gay.
We know you are. Who else would get hysterical over his tats being ridiculed? No, I was speaking metaphorically. Figures you'd go Tosh on us.
I actually thought I was the only one left who hated tattoos. After reading these comments I know I'm not alone.
I first started seeing them in the early 90s and was horrified. I can remember at my grandpa's funeral in May 1990 one of my thoughts was a nice gentle non-tattooed man was dead and born in his place will be a rough tattooed monster of a man. That made me cry just thinking of it. I correctly sensed that the tattoo fad that was just getting started would grow to the point where just about everyone was covered in ink. I was also correct that the babies born that day in 5/90 are by now tattooed. They have no memory of a time when tattoos were rare and considered vulgar by all.
I hate seeing tattoos on men and women. The tattooed man represents the de-evolution of the human race. When our culture was civilized..as recent as the 1980s, a man didn't have to look all tough and badass to fit in,to attract women etc. The fact that every man under 40 is tattooed is saying that a man must not project any nice guy decency. Every man must be a bad boy now and project toughness and crude masculinity.
The tattooed woman represents ugliness. There has been a war against female beauty. Getting women all inked up has been a great victory for those who hate female beauty. It's the American version of the burqa..maybe worse because the burqa can at least come off. TPTB love having a society where men can not enjoy seeing pretty, feminine looking girls. Instead they want you to look at hideous looking inked up creatures...many morbidly obese. Tattooed women are the landscape of Hell on earth.
Oh I never notice or have an interest in the design of a tattoo. I don't care what the "story" is behind it either All tattoos are just an ugly vile blob of ink to me.
They have no memory of a time when tattoos were rare and considered vulgar by all.
Not in regards to just tattoos, but I saw an informercial of singers (including many blacks) from the 1950s and early 1960s. I think this might be it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXqgO63b59c&NR=1
Far contrast between how they look and how our music icons look today (Kesha, Lady Gaga, Beyonce, etc...)
All tattoos are just an ugly vile blob of ink to me.
I'm not a fan of tattoos, but this is just wrong. I used to watch a show called Miami Ink of really high level professional tattoo artists in Miami. The artwork they were doing was as impressive as any art I've ever seen.
"Among the ancients, tattoos were the province of barbarian riff-raff. Civilized ancients like the Greeks, Romans, and Chinese almost universally looked down on them."
Yeah, those barbarian riff-raff were still my ancestors. Celtic and Germanic tribes often tattooed themselves.
"Huh? I have never known a doctor, lawyer, engineer, actuary, accountant, etc, with a tattoo. And I know lots of them socially."
My uncle is a lawyer and has a tattoo. Then again, I'm from the South so maybe things are slightly different here. Nobody looks down on tattoos unless you are covered in them. Even the some of the really religious types get Jesus fish tattoos around here. I understand disliking tattoos, but the absolute fervor that many of the commentators despise them is ridiculous and almost comical...
I have never known a doctor, lawyer, engineer, actuary, accountant, etc, with a tattoo.
I have an uncle who's a top aerospace engineer (PhD) who has a small "SF" tat on his hand from his days as a paratrooper in the special forces. He likes it when people ask him about it so he can pretend to be embarrassed and then use it as a pretext to launch into his war stories.
Tattoos? Tramp stamps? Slut markers?
What the heck is wrong with these people? Why mark up your body? Do you dislike yourself so much you must mark yourself up? Permanently? Have to say permanently because for many, what it costs to remove them will be beyond what many can afford. Sigh... Even women in my dating age range (40+) are starting to get them. Sheesh!
Mack is prepared to whoop all of your asses for not liking tattoos.
One thing I can't figure out - why did Jesse James step out on Sandra Bullock with Kat Von D. She's got tattoos on her forehead.
I think we can probably all agree that tattooed foreheads aren't very "becoming" to a women's overall attractiveness.
Yeah, those barbarian riff-raff were still my ancestors. Celtic and Germanic tribes often tattooed themselves.
Right, they're my ancestors too, but Celtic and Germanic tribes nonetheless had a lot of cultural practices that we would consider unsavory. There are better ways to honor one's ancestors.
And if tattoos were widespread among ancient tribes, presumably they were part of cultural traditions. Whereas today they're used to reject cultural traditions.
Right, they're my ancestors too
Yeah, I suspect that 80% of this blog's readers are descended from Celt and Nordic tribesmen. Maybe we should all go out and get tribal tats to honor our ancestors. I'll be painting myself blue, too. That'll show everyone what a badass I am. (And if they laugh at me, I'll give 'em a fat lip! Yeah I will!)
Used to be the sole province of rough people on the lower rungs of society. When this happens:
http://www.needlesandsins.com/2009/07/13/heart%20tattoo.jpg
it isn't cool, scary, tough, etc. any more.
Things were easier back in the 80's when having a tramp stamp meant something for women. (it meant that they were a tramp) When you saw it, you knew that the chick was loose and you could react accordingly.
Nowadays almost all women have them. . .
And nowadays, almost all women are . . . (fill in the blanks - I bet "prime wife material" wasn't the first thing that crossed your mind).
Tattoos' growing popularity isn't a sign they're going upscale, it's a sign society is going into the gutter.
Agreed.
I like tattoos on men.
On a guy, a tattoo can look alright as long as he doesn't have too many and if he's looks blue collar.
But tattoos on a woman? Nyet!
I agree with most of you 90% of tattoos suck and are not well thought out or well done.
A tattoo that has mental time put into it and done with a very good artist is a piece of work. It is art that becomes part of the owner, part of his/her flesh. in Japan galleries hang the preserved flesh of tatttooed people who donated them.
Tattoos are not for everyone probably not for most. Are they becoming too trendy? yes do many people have poorly thought placing designs and art work? yes. But at the end of the day it is a personal desision.
In a suit or dress shirt you would never see my ink I like it that way. It is for me and only me.
MuayTyson
"their skin is often so dark that you really can't make out the designs anyway."
I can endure black tattoos more for precisely that reason - they usually use dark ink and it blends it with the skin better. It is still disgusting, but not as completely and utterly repulsive as white people who have their arms buried under full-color designs.
I do not have one. Probably a bad idea for most. Many will regret it as they age. It does seem herd driven to a great extent.
But I find the animated bourgeois opinions posted here irritating. LaDe Fu**ing Da.
Perhaps I should get one to symbolize my proletariat upbringing.
"[Arnold] Toynbee says the growth phase of civilization is led by a creative minority who have a strong, self-confident sense of style, virtue and purpose. The uncreative majority follows along through attempts to imitate the creative minority. In disintegrating civilizations, the creative minority (elites) are no longer confident and setting the example. They "lapse into truancy" (reject the obligations of citizenship) and "surrender to a sense of promiscuity" (succumb to vulgarization of manners, the arts and language). Until a few decades ago, the groups we used to call "low-class" or "trash", are now called the underclass. The upper-class, instead of challenging trashy behavior, often imitates and placates it."
http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/articles/01/rolemodels.html
I heard somewhere and strongly agree with this formulation: a man gets to have one tattoo for each time in his life he's been in a real, trying-to-hurt-the-other-guy fight.
For women, a small, tasteful tattoo on the hip, ankle, etc, can be fine and even sexy, but more than that and it quickly gets trashy and unappealing.
Mannerheim,
I think that makes sense. My grandfather has a marine corp tattoo and I once heard him telling one of his students that a man needs to earn his tattoos.
It is my belief that the primary reason people get tattoos is due to low self-worth. They are either self-despising, or, in the case of women who get their private parts tattooed, wanting attention, even if negative. The overall assumption when one gets a tattoo is that someone else will see it. Regardless of the reaction of the viewer, to the tattooed, it is obvious attention. This also goes for the piercing-adorned group as well.
I do not buy the "getting tattooed for myself" argument. If one wants to commemorate an event for oneself, get a diary. It's much cheaper and less public. But, again, I assert that attention-getting is the underlying desire behind tattoos. I see no good reason for anyone with a healthy mind to mutilate his body on purpose.
Most people I know that have tattooed or pierced themselves in extreme ways have mental or emotional issues. Generally, they have a low self worth.
Post a Comment