Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So much for showing your ability to accept differing view points. Arent you also being judgemental? How is your closed mindedness any better than mine? It was an honest answer to the OP. If you think I'm an isolated case, you are seriously out of touch. Most just wont post it as coarsley as i will.
And yes, a tiger portrait would qualify.
I accept different views on anything and everything, thanks. But my judgement is based on the ignorant comments you've posted. That shows your personality. Unlike you, I will not judge based on one's appearance. I will instead use the personality as my basis. That's where the difference is. And lets see, out of 8 pages you're the only one to post in such a hateful way. So yes, you are an isolated case.
My husband has 3 tattoo's. 1 on each forearm and 1 on his elbow. He works for a multi-billion dollar company. He is also one of the top performers out of at least 100 employee's. At first, based on appearance, they assumed he may be a slacker. But if they would have passed on his employment due to the sole reason your closed minded self would, they would have missed out on an extremely hard working employee. Tattoo's do not prove ones work ethic or anything else, for that matter. They're only an adornment for the skin. There are multiple aspects to every single one of us...
Okay, this is a sincere question from an old person (senior woman), and not meant to offend anyone--just looking for answers.
In my generation, tattoos were regarded with a very negative stereotype. They represented ghetto, thugs, criminals, or a macho military type, or a low rider. It usually meant they were tough and not very educated.
I realize times have changed, but what is the deal with young girls getting all these tattoos? Is there now a POSITIVE stereotype with them? Does it reflect creativity, rebellion, sexuality? I see these attractive young girls and women with many visible tattoos, and some of them are educated, so has the negative stereotype vanished?
And while you are at it, could you explain the attraction to body piercings also!
Thanks
I don't know if I'd qualify as "older"... I'm 33... but I can explain it fairly easily. It's all about rebellion, and looking more like a "bad girl" rather than a "good girl". They think they will be seen as more alluring by the type of men they wish to attract if they look "bad". There are articles all over the Internet about how guys like "bad girls"..........
........but here's the kicker. The studies ALSO show that guys only like "bad girls" for fun and excitement. Even of the guys who like "bad girls" in the beginning, the vast majority don't see such girls as marriage material. Essentially, girls, get tattoos if you want to attract a "bad dude" for some fun and games in the beginning, but understand that you're probably going to be staring down your 40th birthday, wondering why you've always been a bridesmaid but never a bride.
I've known women like that. They did their thing in their younger years and then decided at some point (usually their 30s) that they wanted to settle down... at which time they came to realize that it was EXTREMELY difficult to find a "good man" to settle down with. I've heard it all before - "they're either married, divorced with kids, or fresh out of jail".
Some people put aftermarket rims on their cars because they believe it improves the look from factory or makes some statement.
If you feel that a tattoo will improve your looks are make a statement, I say go for it.
Me, I'm perfectly happy with how I look and feel that I can make a statement without a tattoo.
I have plenty of close friends with tattoos. I would hire people with tattoos. It's not that I'm against tattoos, but I do think that most people getting them are just trend followers.
@RomaniGypsy - What's your reasoning for women who get tattoo's in their 30's? Or in some cases, get their first tattoo past middle age at say, 50 or 60?
I got my first tattoo at 16. Another at 17, 18 and 19. It wasn't to look like a "bad girl". It's simply because I like tattoo's. As I said in my previous post, tattooing has evolved tremendously. I greatly appreciate and love art. That's how I see work done by great tattoo artists...as art.
I accept different views on anything and everything, thanks. But my judgement is based on the ignorant comments you've posted. That shows your personality. Unlike you, I will not judge based on one's appearance. I will instead use the personality as my basis. That's where the difference is. And lets see, out of 8 pages you're the only one to post in such a hateful way. So yes, you are an isolated case....
Perhaps I was the only one being honest? I've had a tremendous amount of reps and PM comments in support, so I'm comfortable that my position is more mainstream than you might like to believe. Its easy to take the road of least resistance. Despite your anecdotal observation, I know from experience that many of my peers feel the same way and introduce the same bias. Its not about hatred. Only you introduced that word. I'm assuming from your name that you have lots of things I may not like. But this thread is about you saying that you have or have not worried about the stigma associated with the tats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockrchick
My husband has 3 tattoo's. 1 on each forearm and 1 on his elbow. He works for a multi-billion dollar company. He is also one of the top performers out of at least 100 employee's. At first, based on appearance, they assumed he may be a slacker. But if they would have passed on his employment due to the sole reason your closed minded self would, they would have missed out on an extremely hard working employee. Tattoo's do not prove ones work ethic or anything else, for that matter. They're only an adornment for the skin. There are multiple aspects to every single one of us...
That's great, good for him and for you. Your right they may have missed a great employee, but an equally possible outcome was that they passed on your husband and found a better employee. One that would be THE top performer.
Again, your missing the point of the thread. It isn't about what value people have beyond their tats. It is about if people worry about the stigma. While I cant answer that question directly, I can say that there is a stigma for people with tats and present some examples of how your life MIGHT be different if you make the decision to do this.
Settle down and remember that the thread is not about absolutes or what's right or wrong. Simply about the stigma associated with them.
I was thinking more about this thread the other night. Why? Because I was watching a Behind the Scenes type of show for Modern Family. They talked about how, back in the 50's people were never shown in bed together. Especially not the same bed. That was taboo. Then we progress to not showing kissing, then sex scenes (which, btw, we see in movies all the time like it's nothing) Then, no showing of gay couples kissing. Which we see more so now. Also, what about inter-racial couples? Back then, it was illegal to even marry someone of another color.
My point is. Times change. Things change. Yes, back then tattoos were mainstream for military, gangs, criminals, prisonmates, etc. Nowdays, not so much. Times are changing. I know CEO's with tattoos and I know gangsters and former inmates that have none and don't really want any (not that they don't like them, they just don't care if they have them). Imagine that. Bad boys without tats. What is this world coming to?
I believe there will always be people that have issues with tattoos. It's just how we are. People still have problems with people of other races/color. They still have problems with pre-marital sex or living together before marriage (and it's not always religion related). People will have problems with gay people. This is life. Some people have open minds, others do not. And most likely, you'll never change their minds.
So do people worry about what their tats may say about them, I'm sure some do and some don't. Do they worry about what it will look like later, some do, some don't. I just saw an episode of Bad Ink where the two guys went to stir up business at a retirement home. A woman decided to get a tattoo. I think she was in her 70's. She's already wrinkled. :P And then an older man told the two guys, to "get out" after their time was up (to be there in the retirement home/community). I doubt the senior woman cared about what anyone said. BTW, she got a rosary around her wrist and she was happy because now she won't "lose it", it meant a lot to her, and it was beautifully done. And I didn't know where my career would take me, so I put my tattoos in places that could be covered up by a suit.
I guess that's always my question. Why do you care what I do with my life? And how is it affecting you in any sort of way? Especially when it comes to tattoos.
And lastly, just for the heck of it, I have seen bumper stickers on Ferrari's, Rolls, and a Lambo or two. None on a Bentley though. Do I think they're crazy? Yes, because I don't put stickers on my car. But then, hey, it's their car, they can do what they want. Just like I don't care about the person who has 5 million Jesus stickers on their beat up old POS. I may shake my head, but hey, to each their own. Obviously, they love their beater car and Jesus. And I'm fine with that because it affects me in no way whatsoever.
@RomaniGypsy - What's your reasoning for women who get tattoo's in their 30's?
Early midlife crisis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockrchick
Or in some cases, get their first tattoo past middle age at say, 50 or 60?
Late midlife crisis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockrchick
I got my first tattoo at 16. Another at 17, 18 and 19. It wasn't to look like a "bad girl". It's simply because I like tattoo's. As I said in my previous post, tattooing has evolved tremendously. I greatly appreciate and love art. That's how I see work done by great tattoo artists...as art.
I'll never disrespect art, but art is for media that are not living. Art is to hang on your wall, admire in a museum, view in a public square, etc. Plus, as a Christian man, I can believe naught else but God created us to look exactly as He intended for us to look. Consciously changing our basic appearance in some physiologically unnatural way elevates us above God by implying that we know better than God what "looks good" and what "does not look good". I, for one, choose not to pick that fight with Almighty God. I trust Him more than I'll ever trust any human being.
I've known many a person who has gotten a tattoo and not one has been without a rebellious streak, regardless of the meaning or the desire underlying the tattoos. They may even be totally nice people... and many have been. I never said that it had to do with "niceness"... it has to do with wanting to look "bad" to an extent... or, put a different way, it has to do with choosing to conform to a certain image that you want to project. Given that a tattoo does absolutely nothing except change your appearance, the purpose of a tattoo can only be for the image factor.
I actually thought about getting a tattoo once, for all of my distaste toward tattoos. When my wife and I got engaged almost three years ago, I suggested we get wedding ring tattoos after we get married. That way, it'd be permanent. Even if we had real rings, rings can be taken off. How many times have you heard of someone who is married, going out on the town without his/her wedding ring, to philander a bit? I felt that the permanence of a tattoo would be a better outward sign of the marriage commitment than a ring which can easily be removed... but my wife didn't want to do that, so we didn't. Even that would be about the image though... the outward sign of "hey, I'm taken, so back off".
We’ve seen in this thread much defense of tattoos as being yet another form of self-expression, one that’s come to transcend obsolete stigmas and to offer new outlets for creativity. Fine. But please help me to understand: what is so laudable and appealing about overt self-expression in the first place?
I refer to bumper stickers, T-shirts with written remarks, posters in dormitory rooms, office cubicle-decorations and whatever else channels our desires to “make a statement”. 100 years ago, it was not considered so essential to display one’s viewpoints or communal associations. Quite the contrary; it was regarded as boorish. Clothing consisted of solid-color fabrics. Products were not “personalized”. Instead, people wrote poetry, composed songs, met for debating sessions. Now we plaster our most pithy remarks on our suitcases and sedans. Tattoos are merely the next step, injecting under one’s skin what would otherwise be stitched into one’s shirt.
Again I ask: what’s the appeal of overt self-expression?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
