Firstly, who would be stupid enough to get a semi-permanent design on a kid?
Never mind, I just remembered that the most popular TV program is pro wrestling.
Secondly, if this were real, adults would line up – a tattoo that only lasts a decade? I can be is style now, and still look professional in the future, when I have a family and need a job? Oh yeah, great concept, truly.
Thirdly, Hi Opal! (I know, it’s a cliche. But I’m old school, alright?)
I suspect this is a hoax. But it’s clever, look at all the Google ads – I’d say it’s a profitable hoax.
If it’s real. . . One more sign of an impending apocalypse.
No shit…in 10 years your skin will have totally replaced itself how many times? “Needle-free” means the design will be gone long before the kids next birthday. Still a stupid idea, but not anything even semi-permanent.
I may have to look into this…maybe I can sport a wicked “tattoo” on my skull for the first day of school, knowing it will be gone by “Back To School Night.”
Since it is near the end of March, and several years ago a radio station did something similar as an April fool’s prank, I’d suspect that this more of the same.
What purpose does the site serve? There’s no way anyone earnestly wishing to have their child tattooed can find out where it can be done – the most detailed information given about locations resolves only to the city level.
The contact page invites people to tell the operators “what you think of Tattoos 4 Toddlers!”
How does this benefit them?
Say I’m in Des Moines and I want a tattoo for my four-year old? How does this site facilitate that?
It doesn’t.
I do have a lovely live kitten in a plexiglass cube on my desk, though. That’s totally real, don’t believe the naysayers.
But I’m getting a fascinating mix of Google ads - they’re split about 50/50 between “tattoo” ads and…“wedding” ads (including two for gay marriage/civil union receptions). Huh.
It would be very embarassing to tatoo “Sexy Pre-teen” on a youngster only to have be untrue 10 years later. Clearly you have to give this type of thing some serious thought.
I saw a boy, around 4, shirtless, walking with his Biker dad. The boy had a HD tat covering his chest. No, it wasn’t one of those temp “lick and stick” tattoos.
Oh, ugh. I wouldn’t think a tattoo parlor would be responsible for that, since they could get into trouble for it, though. More likely, if kids are getting tattoos it’s because their idiot parents or their idiot parents’ friends have their own tattoo guns.
How do you know? Or how do you know it wasn’t markers?
The reason I don’t buy it is that one assumes the only people getting their 4 year old tatts would have tatts themselves. And I’ve seen the mess a tatt gets to be after a pregnancy stretches the belly. Growing from a 4 year old chest size to an adult (or even a 14 year old) would render the (expensive) tatt an amorphous blob.
