Personally, I would prefer no tattoos. The human body is great as is; I don’t see a need to draw on it.
But I have gone out with a couple people who had them. Sometimes a tattoo, well placed and in very good taste and done with excellent execution can be attractive (there was a woman I had a big crush on who had a perfect and simple tattoo on the back of her neck–it was cool). Small tattoos, even if they aren’t great, can be OK if they are out of the way.
But the following are dealbreakers for me in being attracted to someone (thus rendering me unable to be in a relationship with her):
• Chest tattoos. Jesus, why do pretty women get these?! They are awful awful awful. They are also inexplicably common in women who don’t have a lot of ink otherwise. And they are almost always tasteless and ugly. But even if it were well done, I don’t think I could be into seeing one while having sex, etc.
• Neck and face tattoos, needless to say.
• Anything big, especially if it is ugly. Lord, on dating sites, soooo many chicks flaunt their awful white trash “masterpieces.” Scary.
• Too many, all over the place.
The exception to the above is a chick who is totally inked and punk and just does it all well. In such a case, it’s possible for me to be attracted, since the style is consistent and complete. I’m not sure I would want that look forever and aye, but it could at least be attractive to me in the short term.
Short answer, no.
I love well executed and well thought out tattoos on a woman. Sadly, I rarely see good ink. The place I work hires a lot of short term temps, many of them young and female. They almost all have some tats and almost always they are crappy. Even the women closer to my age usually have at least one or two visible tattoos. I am shocked at how much ink some of them have at such a young age. I think the criteria they use for the tattoos they get is to find the closest place and get what’s on sale!
I would date a heavily tattooed woman but only if I thought her ink looked good.
I don’t have a lot of deal breakers aside from the “will she boil my rabbit” test. Tattoos are usually a slight negative in my mind. Now tattoos, especially among some of the heavily tattooed, can send messages that the rabbit is in danger. That’s more what’s being expressed than how, though.
If the tattoos become self-animated and begin staging Ray Bradbury stories, I’m outtathere and so should you.
In the real world, same reaction will accompany any ink that conveys gang affiliation ID.
Otherwise it’s essentially a matter of tastes. Something artistically well accomplished, or significant to the person, can be an enhancement to the interpersonal discourse. Something badly executed or stupid OTOH will be a distraction and may rise to too much of an annoyance.
In this area I’m very old fashioned. I can’t abide tattoos in the women I date, and in fact nobody I’ve dated has had any tattoos. I find them very unsexy. Of course it’s all moot because I’ve been married for years.
It’s never a positive when it comes to attractiveness but it isn’t a deal breaker. As for relationships I suppose someone who would be into lots of tattoos would probably have a lifestyle that doesn’t match mine and visa versa.
The tattoo thing is so ubiquitous that I wonder if it’s gotten to the point where not having tattoos is a turn-off.
As I mentioned in this thread, we recently hired a young engineer in our lab, and he mentioned he had a tattoo on his back and on his right arm. I asked him why so many young people have tattoos, and he said (my paraphrasing), “Women find tattoos attractive. It’s hard to get laid without them.”
I understand this is simply his opinion. But it makes ya wonder if there’s not a grain of truth to this…
