Nope, no stereotype. You see, the democrats opposed the president’s tax cut claiming that it would only benefit the ‘rich’, which by their definition is those who make $100k +. Personally, I don’t think that’s ‘rich’, but by democratic ideology it would seem to be.
(Blasted hamsters. Please excuse if this multiposts; board’s all gummed up with molasses or something tonight.)
I’d be hesitant to use the ‘this is about how tats look on women, not guys’ argument, even in jest, given that there’s been some perception of sexist bias in the original rant; I’d be surprised if there weren’t emotional slop-over. I have gotten the impression that tats on men are deemed less an issue by some subset of the objectors primarily because men aren’t targets of sexual appeal – so if they “mar” themselves, that’s no real loss. That’s not exactly the most comfortable vibe to witness.
If you’re one of those people who thinks that tats are degrading or harmful or what have you, I don’t know what and I don’t much care, but I’d expect them to do their harm equally. If the effect is greater on women because of an evaluation of fuckability, I find that more than a little freaky.
I’m sympathetic to some of your presented perspective, dropzone, in part because I’ve read a sociological study of tattooing and found it interesting; the cultural shifts are by no means well-established or universal. (Anyone who wants to pick it up, it’s called Customizing the Body: The Art and Culture of Tattooing and the author is Clinton R. Sanders. I don’t know if it’s in print; it was an impulse purchase in a used bookstore.) I’d actually recommend it to people who’d be interested in information about the culture and meaningfulness of tattooing to some of the people who have them, specifically, if I’m remembering right, those in the American tat culture in particular. It covers things that have been brought up here peripherally, like distinctions between flash and original pieces, cultural stuff, history . . . I found it a neat book, but I’m a bit of a sociology buff, and I like reading about cultures that aren’t my own.
I don’t have any ink; I expect that that will change sometime in the future. I don’t have any piercings, either (not even ears), and I expect that the only way that will change is if I get a personality wipe and rebuild. Just to mention what dogs I’ve got in this fight.
(Blasted hamsters. Please excuse if this multiposts; board’s all gummed up with molasses or something tonight.)
I’d be hesitant to use the ‘this is about how tats look on women, not guys’ argument, even in jest, given that there’s been some perception of sexist bias in the original rant; I’d be surprised if there weren’t emotional slop-over. I have gotten the impression that tats on men are deemed less an issue by some subset of the objectors primarily because men aren’t targets of sexual appeal – so if they “mar” themselves, that’s no real loss. That’s not exactly the most comfortable vibe to witness.
If you’re one of those people who thinks that tats are degrading or harmful or what have you, I don’t know what and I don’t much care, but I’d expect them to do their harm equally. If the effect is greater on women because of an evaluation of fuckability, I find that more than a little freaky.
I’m sympathetic to some of your presented perspective, dropzone, in part because I’ve read a sociological study of tattooing and found it interesting; the cultural shifts are by no means well-established or universal. (Anyone who wants to pick it up, it’s called Customizing the Body: The Art and Culture of Tattooing and the author is Clinton R. Sanders. I don’t know if it’s in print; it was an impulse purchase in a used bookstore.) I’d actually recommend it to people who’d be interested in information about the culture and meaningfulness of tattooing to some of the people who have them, specifically, if I’m remembering right, those in the American tat culture in particular. It covers things that have been brought up here peripherally, like distinctions between flash and original pieces, cultural stuff, history . . . I found it a neat book, but I’m a bit of a sociology buff, and I like reading about cultures that aren’t my own.
I don’t have any ink; I expect that that will change sometime in the future. I don’t have any piercings, either (not even ears), and I expect that the only way that will change is if I get a personality wipe and rebuild. Just to mention what dogs I’ve got in this fight.
(Blasted hamsters. Please excuse if this multiposts; board’s all gummed up with molasses or something tonight.)
I’d be hesitant to use the ‘this is about how tats look on women, not guys’ argument, even in jest, given that there’s been some perception of sexist bias in the original rant; I’d be surprised if there weren’t emotional slop-over. I have gotten the impression that tats on men are deemed less an issue by some subset of the objectors primarily because men aren’t targets of sexual appeal – so if they “mar” themselves, that’s no real loss. That’s not exactly the most comfortable vibe to witness.
If you’re one of those people who thinks that tats are degrading or harmful or what have you, I don’t know what and I don’t much care, but I’d expect them to do their harm equally. If the effect is greater on women because of an evaluation of fuckability, I find that more than a little freaky.
I’m sympathetic to some of your presented perspective, dropzone, in part because I’ve read a sociological study of tattooing and found it interesting; the cultural shifts are by no means well-established or universal. (Anyone who wants to pick it up, it’s called Customizing the Body: The Art and Culture of Tattooing and the author is Clinton R. Sanders. I don’t know if it’s in print; it was an impulse purchase in a used bookstore.) I’d actually recommend it to people who’d be interested in information about the culture and meaningfulness of tattooing to some of the people who have them, specifically, if I’m remembering right, those in the American tat culture in particular. It covers things that have been brought up here peripherally, like distinctions between flash and original pieces, cultural stuff, history . . . I found it a neat book, but I’m a bit of a sociology buff, and I like reading about cultures that aren’t my own.
I don’t have any ink; I expect that that will change sometime in the future. I don’t have any piercings, either (not even ears), and I expect that the only way that will change is if I get a personality wipe and rebuild. Just to mention what dogs I’ve got in this fight.
The judgemental prick is trying to tell me not to be judgemental.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
That’s so dumb, it’s funny.
The point! There is a huge difference between someone who recognizes a bias and tries to stay conscious of its irrationality and someone who flat refuses to question his or her point of view. When it comes to judging the worth of another person most sane people know that you can’t go by externals no matter how quick and efficient it might seem to do so.
I don’t have an argument in the world against people with an automatic bias against tattoos. I see tons of tattoos that give me a bad impression. I’ve never actually seen a rose tattooed on a breast but I definitely have a notion that roses get tattooed to breasts by women who think it’s sexy and find it ironic that I find it unsexy. The difference between me and Muad’Dib is that my judgement and my knowledge that the judgement is a baseless and worthless prejudice have equal strength in my consiousness. I don’t expect people to conform to my prejudiced associations. I’m not surprised in the least when someone’s character doesn’t match the stereotype because it’s clear to me that stereotypes are extremely suspect and that, though it’s natural for me to make automatic associations, I’m in no way bound to them. If I was in line behind a woman with a rose tattooed to her breast I might have a fleeting notion that she has enjoyed heavy metal and beer at some time in her life but I certainly wouldn’t be surprised in any way if we got to chatting and she didn’t fit the flimsy stereotype. I’m fully aware that the associations are my issue. Human beings in general are not responsible for adjusting their appearance to conform with my personal impressions. Jesus.
A post like, “If women get tattoos to attract the average guy they are misguided!” would never ever in a hundred years bother me. I’d probably post to agree. But this is a topic called, “Girls, stop getting tattoos it makes you look skanky.”
If I started a topic that said, “Guys, stop being sci-fi fans who post on the internet, it makes you seem like fat losers with small dicks” many people would say “why the hell does she think guys choose interests to attract women? Why does she think anyone cares that she’s a shallow jerk who only likes stereotypically physically fit men with big dicks whose personal likes and dislikes are tailored to attract shallow women??” And many fat, small penised men would say, “What the hell is wrong with being fat and small-penised?” People would NOT likely focus on what an artform Science Fiction can be and post examples! But the fact is that nobody would ever start such an outrageously stupid topic! Nobody cares if I have some small notion in the back of my head that sci-fi=geek=inexperienced with women=socially inept=worthless because that is a stupid, usless stereotype and if I can’t recognize that what kind of person am I? But it’s somehow okay for someone to crow about his tattoos=self mutilation=low self esteem=lack of sexual virtue=worthless notion? Why? What’s the difference? In both cases someone is acting as if his own stupid associations are valid when they are clearly NOT.
Dropzone can admit his bias without giving it credit like any responsible person would do. Somehow in this thread he seems like a hero just for being able to admit that he works on his character defects. Unlike a bunch of others who feel comfortable smugly stating that they have an irrational bias against women with tattoos and are damn proud of it.
If it were as simple as “I don’t like tattoos,” I doubt anyone would have anything to say besides, “sorry to hear that.” There’s no particular insult in that unless you are a tattoo. But telling people that their harmless behaviour is wrong just because you don’t happen to like it is bullshit and defending it as if it were a rational point of view is bullshit. People who reserve judgements based on looks don’t accidentally date people they’re not attracted to. They don’t suddenly lose an important ability to assess danger or anything. Everyone knows that. DUMB arguments in favour of telling off girls with tattoos for looking slutty. Insulting random people for no reason and then trying to act like it’s a perfectly fair and reasonable thing to do because expressing opinions that have no rational basis is a jolly way to pass time. STUPID.
YA’LL CRACK ME UP!
IM SO FUCKING GLAD I DIDN’T GET THAT TATTOO OF A ROSE ON MY THIGH WHEN I WAS 16!!!
iM SO FUCKING GLAD I DIDN’T GET A FUCKING TATTOO OF A SUN AROUND MY BELLY BUTTON WHEN I WAS 18 AND i AM SO FUCKING GLAD I DIDN’T GET A TATTO OF A FLOWER ON MY HAND WHEN I WAS 20!!!
MY GOD IT WAS ALL A PHASE I WENT THRU AND MANAGED TO GET AWAY WITH JUST ONE TINY BUTTERFLY ON MY BREAST WHICH I WILL HAVE LASERD OFF. WHY??? BECAUSE IT LOOOKS SKANKY!!
Hey, Peach: Fuck you.
You think you look skanky with a tat, more power to ya. But you said it, not me. I’m not a skanky ho, and I don’t look like one. JLo looks skanky. Not me.
Its “y’all”, not ya’ll; “I’m”, not IM nor even iM; “tattoo”, not “tatto”; “through”, not thru; “lasered”, not laserd; and I’m saddened to hear that your breasts look so skanky that you’re forced to have them lasered off.
On the other hand, it is heartening to know that we crack you up. There can’t be many joys in life for a woman who hates her own breasts and we should be proud that we were able, if only for a brief moment in time, to distract you from your, apparently well-justified, disgust.
Also, posting in all caps won’t cause the rest of us who are very happy with our tattoos to abruptly change our minds; it serves only to make you look more of a fool. Really, you don’t need the added help.
Peach, what the holy-gerbil fuck are you talking about?
You’re glad you didn’t follow a ‘fad’ but you have a really cliche rose on your tit? And where in this thread have any of us said we’ve got just flash? And even if some of us do, we apparently don’t regret it. So back the fuck off and stop projecting your insecurities about your inability to make responsible decisions in life on us.
Peach, best get the laser tech to turn off your caps lock.
Clearly once you get you get that tattoo removed, it’s going to be class all the way.
AND ANOTHER THING!!!
yall think im such a tight ass but that can’t be futher from the truth.
i got my tongue pierced so long ago, people would come up to me as say "how coool!’ AND IM IN SEATTLE!
now everyone and their dog has a pierce tongue and i think it look SO STUPID!! thats right STUPID!
the only thing that has stand the test of time is my belly ring (true beauty)
so fuck you FREAKS - Especially you jinwicked!
I assure you, no one is thinking about your ass. Unless you are referring to the one on top of your neck.
That is coool!
Wow! In Seattle no less?! That’s even coooler!
Since you are obviously the arbiter of cooolness, I bow to your superior aesthetic sense.
Beauty is in the bellybutton of the beholder – carrot, 2003.
I’m heavily tattooed. Very heavily. I have no problem with those who think tattoos are a bad idea and look stupid, and mine especially so. That belief is shared by my parents, who I love dearly.
The problem starts when people assume that because I have large visible tattoos that I must have had certain motivations for getting them, or that I have a certain personality, and that they accordingly have the right to make rude personal comments to me. I had a once had a classmate in law school ask me “what horrible event in my childhood could have caused me to do this to myself.” Pretty much the only thing I could think of was that I never got to go to Disneyland because my mother is afraid of flying. The only really valid assumption someone else can make is that several times in my life I made what they would consider to be a very poor decision that involved sitting in a chair for several hours.
pokey: excellent post.
carrot im an ass because my opinion is different from yours??
THATS THE STUPIDEST THING IVE HEARD ALL DAY.
you think your so “original” with your tats and piercings but you know what? You look like a clone, part of the herd, extremely UNoriginal.
Thanks, I’ll remember that while I’m reading my fan mail every night, what with all the compliments about how nice I look and what an original and cool person I am.
Peaches are sweet, perhaps you should change your name to sour grapes, dear.
There is nothing new under the sun and everything you can do with your body has been done by somebody before. Even those people who split their tongues are now accused of following a trend. I really don’t see anyone in this thread promoting themselves as original because they have tattoos or piercings, or because they don’t have tattoos or piercings. You’re the only one that seems to think that matters in making a person “original.”
And OMG SEATTLE LOL!!1!111!! UR ROXORZ! Clearly living in a city that was sexy for a little while makes you the Queen of Trendiness. Hey, my grandmother lives in New York, is she also an arbiter of cool?
(By the way, Muad, I reconsidered my opinion and sent you an e-mail. Not sure if you got it, so I’ll summarize - after rereading your statements, I think I was reacting to something you didn’t say or imply, and I formally retract my huffiness.)
Uh. Yeah. They contained absolutely NO information supporting your claims, they were advertisements for two books, which may have said any number of things about the subject.
You’re WAY off-base here. You don’t like tattoos, fine. But to make a sweeping generalization that it makes girls look “skanky” and that “most men” don’t like them etc, is just absurd.
FTR, I don’t have tattoos, and am not all that crazy about most of them, but still support people’s right to express their creativity in their own way. I don’t think it makes people look “skanky” or any <belittling adjective> for that matter. And a man who had a few tattoos wouldn’t present a “dealbreaker” for me regarding dating him. Why should it be different for men considering dating a girl with a tattoo?
It’s really sexist and double-standardish to act as if “men” do consider them “skanky” and dealbreakers. I mean, there are 6 billion people on the planet. What percentage of that number does the “many, many men” you asked make up?
I don’t care what any of you say, but I don’t think a woman is sexy unless she’s missing a thumb.