Kunstler is a brilliant plain-talking visionary in some respects and a social-conservative crank in others, IMO. See this thread.
Most tattoo designs have always been cliched and stupid shit. Anchors? Mom? Flaming skulls? Come on, this shit was lame before a new generation of kids came up with new cliched designs like tramp stamp suns, barbed wire, Chinese characters and dolphins.
And I guarantee you your lawyer friend wears that suit in court because most judges are old coots who think less of people with tattoos.
No argument can be made against publicly visible tattoos (other than their permanence) that does not apply to any other adornment, whether it’s makeup, jewelry or whacking out your teeth and sticking that big disc thing in a hole in your lower lip. Lip plate - Wikipedia
Whether or not something is tasteful is a matter of personal opinion on an individual level, and societal norms on a public level.
With respect to societal norms, the tattooee’s problem is that they join a cohort whose average characteristics are marginal even if one of that cohort became a lawyer and another became a star actress.
As getting a tattoo–particularly higher quality ones–becomes more mainstream, the characteristics of the cohort will improve. That’s why we in the Emergency Department look at both the number (and sometimes distribution) of tattoos as well as the number of teeth in evaluating a patient.
http://keepbreathing.wordpress.com/2007/09/17/the-magic-ratio/ e.g.
Like a lot of others in this thread, I agree that there’s nothing inherently barbaric or uncivilized about tattoos. They are just another form of self decoration, something humans have done throughout the ages.
I think tattoos are also pretty far into mainstream culture to not even be considered fringe anymore. Wasn’t there a Pew research poll that said something like 40% of Americans had at least one? That’s a pretty high number.
[personal anecdote warning]
My grandfather gave himself his first tattoo at age 13, and got both of his arms almost completely done when he served in the navy in WW2. Pretty generic things - a snake around an anchor, an eagle clutching arrows, horse shoes, etc. He was also a missionary and a successful business owner in his life, and as far as I knew, he never tried to hide his tattoos (not that I think anyone would would give a WW2 vet grief over navy tattoos, though).
I’ve worked in design and IT fields (which granted are more liberal when it comes to appearances), and have always been surrounded by tattooed, pierced, and bright-haired people. Even my dermatologist is covered in them. The stigma is pretty much gone in those fields, and I’m guessing as soon as the current 20-somethings and teens that have them now grow up and enter the broader workforce it’ll erode even more.
[/personal anecdote]
Sure, those people that get naked pin-up girls and crude words inked on them will probably regret it, but Jane in accounting with the flower on her wrist isn’t really going to draw much more attention than Pam with the flashy hoop earrings.
It’s neither brilliant nor visionary to be against bad architecture & urban planning (does he DO anything?), and he’s wrong when he lumps all “modern architecture” together.
Have you ever talked to someone with a facial tattoo?
Yup, they were degenerates who were telling me they didn’t want to pay their library fines.
One was telling me that late fines were a conspiracy (!) by the library system to separate hard working folks from tax money the government doesn’t deserve.
The other was telling me (while smelling of cigarettes and booze) that she couldn’t return the books she had out because she had to bring her 14 year old to the hospital to give birth.
I’m sure there are fabulous people who have facial tattoos, but I’ve never met one and the two most famous owners of facial tattoos in America, Mike Tyson and Charlie Manson, don’t fill me with confidence either.
Do you think their kids will want to get tattoos and piercings?
Can we at least all agree that leg tattoos are universally stupid and ugly? I’ve never seen one that I didn’t think was a dirty sweat sock at first.
Hey, at least they read!
Not necessarily. You can also check out DVDs from libraries.
It’s an utterly culturally determined statement. Body art is no more inherently savage than men with little ornamental nooses around their necks.
I think nobody who espouses Peak Oil has the standing to denigrate any other activity, and that includes September 11th and moon landing conspiracy theories. Further, the guy is trucking in stereotypes and clearly is having a “get those damn kids off my lawn” moment. Anybody who treats that post as a serious argument is doing himself an disservice intellectually. Cannibals and whores? Give me a fucking break.
Is any one else impressed by the irony that tattoos, once the preferred means to say “hey, I’m a rebel!” have become a sign of middle class conformity in many circles?
No, tattoos do not signifieth the social outcasts any more; they instead often identify those who most want to conform.
Or maybe they will be so fashionable that people will look at you funny if you lack a visible tattoo. Regardless of how you ( or I ) look upon tattoos, their acceptability or the lack thereof is purely a matter of fashion, and arbitrary. And 30 years is a long time for fashion. In 30 years the cutting edge of fashion may well be nano/biotech based animated tattoos that run off your blood sugar.
As for me ? I’m indifferent to tattoos. I can’t see how they qualify as a sign of degeneration any more than long hair on men and short hair on women. Speaking of which, if getting a tattoo is “mutilation” as some have called it what about cutting your hair or shaving ?
You’re misremembering the results of this study. It’s only 40% of Americans within a particular age group.
According to Pew’s A Portrait of “Generation Next”, 36% of Americans ages 18-25 and 40% ages 26-40 have ever had a tattoo. Only 10% of Americans 41-64 have ever had a tattoo. (These figures do include people who once had a tattoo but later had it removed.)
The same study does show that tattoos are more popular among Americans ages 18-40 than non-ear piercings or “untraditional” hair colors. And that’s considering people who’ve ever had a tattoo, body piercing, or strange hair color, not just the ones who have them now.
I think more people would be impressed by this if you were saying it at the turn of the last decade. 
It’s become kind of a dated observation.
Since tattoos have been around for millennia, I think it’s unlikely they will be gone in 30 years. Will they be less popular among people in the West? Yeah, probably. But they won’t return to their previous levels of ‘outlaw’ status either, and they’ll still be fairly common. Not every kid has long hair anymore, but it’s not regarded as freakish by most people either. Tattoos will probably end up with more or less the same status.
It’s a good bet that well before 30 years is up, tattoo marking will have evolved so that it’s permanent until the owner wants it erased. I’d be surprised if erasing a tattoo at that point is any harder than shining a special light on it.As a geezer Dad that’s partly why I think it’s dumb to mark your skin now with centuries-old technology…
Tattoos qualify as a sign of degeneration because that’s the stereotype of the entire cohort. Ditto stereotyping w/ long haired hippies and short-haired butches. But of course which tattoo, and where, and how many, and how many associated absent teeth all figure into the calculation of how much an individual tattooee fits the broad stereotype.
I think some semipermanent tattoos have already been developed, and yes, that’ll probably continue.
I’m not sure if this statement means anything.
I don’t wear tattoos and would never consider it. But I think the thesis is just plain stupid and bigoted.