THE POLITICAL BACKLASH OF TATTOOS

[HMS Thunder Child]

black_wing_angel

HMS Thunder Child

black_wing_angel

HMS Thunder Child

black_wing_angel

I hang out at a tattoo shop my best friend works at, regularly. I do not have any ink of my own, and have absolutely no desire to (considered it a few times, but decided I couldn't commit to the permanency, compared to the uncertainty of the future). Regardless, I've seen absolutely no shortage of it. Hell, my buddy himself has at least 20. I've seen tattoos being done that I know in my heart are going to be cherished forever, and I've seen tattoos done that I guaran-goddamn-tee will be covered, inside of 3 years from now.

And I don't recall saying I have a problem with them. I don't, in general. I have an aversion to potential content, that may prove to be regretful, in the future. ESPECIALLY those who tattoo lovers' names or faces onto their bodies. Yeah, it's really sweet, and all. But permanent. Your relationship very well might not be. Lawyers advise prenups, for a reason.



In and of itself? Nothing. But it's generally a lot less likely for people to take you seriously. Not speaking of myself, but of the general society. And it has a lot more to do with the content of the tattoo, than simply the placement. You're going to feel awfully foolish someday, when you carry "Chevrolet Forever!" on your back, pressed against the upholstry in a Toyota.



I don't really see how. A phone can benefit you greatly, in a time of desperation. Car breaks down? Call a friend or tow truck. Accidentally slice your thumb down to the bone? 911. A tattoo has absolutely no benefits, except aesthetic.

I have aboslutely no idea how you can compare the 2.



It's not. But not for that reason.

[Skeptical]

I recall you saying something to the effect of you not dating someone for having too many tattoos.

Oh, that. Yeah, I think having too many, or just the wrong tattoos really takes away from one's natural beauty. The same with piercings. 1 or 2 in strategic places can be quite pretty. But when your entire face looks like a metal shop floor, it just takes away.

Quote:

Also, I don't really see anything wrong with name tattoos, though I know others do and I take no issue with that.

Depends on who's name. Your child? Perfect. That's a permanent bond. Zero risk. But your boyfriend you've been dating for 3 weeks? No.

Quote:

I enjoy the notion of permanence. It's human nature to forget some of our more tragic failings. Psychologically healthy or whatever. Balls to that, I say. Never forget, get it perma-inked onto your bod.

See above.

Biannual. As in people buy a new phone more often than I buy clothes. Granted, I'm poor/cheap, but still. My phone is almost six years old. Dinged and scratched to all hell, but it still works. And it doesn't need apps or anything like that, either. The alarm clock is handy, though, I will admit.

Yeah, I've consistently avoided smart-phones thus far. And plan to continue to. They offer very little practical tools, that aren't present on my current phone. Although I do update bi-annually, just because by then, the current one's been through enough hell, and it's time to retire it.

Quote:

Might ought to explain yourself here. Tattoos are a personal thing. Conspicuous consumption is all about bragging about material wealth and status through purchase and presentation of things. One's whatever, the other's the bane of existence and is one of the things rotting in the guts of the West. West tries to mouthwash, cleanse the stink out, but the stink's in its guts.

I have no idea what you're talking about, here...

[Earnest]

I dig them both. Everyone has their limits, but I'm pretty sure my upper limit is far higher than yours. They don't bug me. Some sub-dermals, maybe, but it's not really my body, so I'm not really in a position to talk. I just won't get them.

Admirable. But a trait shared by few. And I can guarantee you that your upper limit is higher than mine. *shrug* I can't help what turns me on and off.

Quote:

Depends on the three weeks. If they're important enough, good or bad, why not? I like the idea of the body as an encyclopedia, though, so I'm bound to be biased that way.

*shrug* To each his own. But one must remember that others might not see the same way you do. A lot of people might shy away from a woman who has another man's name tattooed on her body. That can raise several red flags.

Quote:

I don't see how the average person can do enough damage to their phone to justify such frequent purchases barring construction work and so on, and they make phones for those kinds of jobs. I actually want one. Built like a brick, can't even drown them.

I don't know. I've seen phones that are especially fragile. Especially "smart phones". Those things are more fragile than glass...

Quote:

[Informative]

I was saying I see much less wrong with someone inking themselves, even if they're dumb tattoos (which isn't my place to judge since it might be important to them), than someone buying tons of expensive stuff for the sole purpose of showing off their wealth.

And that's your perogative. But at the same time, a tattoo is mostly permanent. While I can go through a mid-life crisis and buy a Harley, ride it for some 2 or 3 years before I grow out of my crisis, and sell it off. Material wealth items can be removed, if necessary. Ink may or may not be.

[Informative]

Generally, you can. Keep telling yourself something is attractive or unattractive and you can change your mind.

Wouldn't bother me. If someone was significant enough in my life and I got the tattoo when times were good (because during a relationship collapse or after the fact would be creepy inappropriate), why not keep it? Also, I don't plan on seeing anyone for a long time, so it'd be a moot point if I had such a tattoo, which I do not, so it's a moot point either way.

Not smart phones I'm talking about. Military spec'd phones. They're neat, but a little more expensive than a sixty dollar Nokia.

Permanence is a good thing. Like I said, I like the idea of using tattoos to make oneself an encyclopedia of their life. Hiding the unpleasant events, while psychologically healthy, isn't exactly honest. That being said, I sure as hell don't plan on having my sexual assault tattooed, so it's not a hard and fast rule. Also, even though material goods can be sold, when people buy them and parade them around and rub them in peoples faces like douchelords, it's an incredibly bad thing. Tattoos aren't like that. Yes, people can wear them out and sometimes show them off. It's not done for the same reason, though. Former's like showing kids at the playground all of your cool toys and bragging, while the latter is showing kids at the playground pictures you've drawn.

[Reidmarr von Brugge]

So just because I have a tattoo of my family crest on my left bicep makes me unreliable? I am loyal to my family name. Why is that such a bad thing?

[duldol v3]

Kozumuda

So just because I have a tattoo of my family crest on my left bicep makes me unreliable? I am loyal to my family name. Why is that such a bad thing?

It's not. Just some people find it unprofessional. Which I disagree with

[ACRESONMYHOES]

Agent Borealis

duldol v3

following your logic, with my experience with all the majority of guys i've come across that have broken my heart, i might as well just believe all guys are cruel assholes.

or for that matter, anyone colored is a thief.

Perhaps those examples are poorly deduced conclusions to an observed pattern. The general idea still stands though. I wouldn't call it prejudice.

Based on my own pattern recognition for example, I would be quite afraid of walking past a group of young guys on a street corner. I would watch my things in the presence of most black people (in my area) because I've been robbed by suspicious looking black guys before.

Well, you're a damn racist, then. They didn't rob you because they were black, they robbed you because of their mental state, which can't be deduced from their ******** skin color. If you have a memory, you would maybe be able to look back and figure out what about their STANCE VOICE LANGUAGE and FACE could have tipped you off, but you're so blinded by the black fact that you probably don't even remember what happened clearly. Or you didn't see them at all, in which case you may not even know they were black.
What specifically happened?

[duldol v3]

I AM R U

duldol v3

I AM R U

duldol v3

black_wing_angel

Technically, judging someone for their tattoos IS judging them for their actions.

But regardless, I believe it all comes down to what and where. A small tattoo that can be easily concealed, if necessary? No harm in it. Having your entire body covered in ink? That's not quite so reasonable. And having a tattoo of your national flag, or a heart or butterfly or whatever? Sure. Why not? But too many of the tattoos people get, are ill-conceived "spur of the moment" decisions, that they'll inevitably regret, once time goes by. All you really have to do, is google search "tattoo fail", and you'll see the kind of s**t I'm talking about. Someone with some of THOSE tattoos? I wouldn't trust with such a high responsibility. They've already shown a distinct lack of forethought.

Yes, some tattoos are done rather quickly, however some tattoos are actually thought about for quite a long time and a great amount of research is done into the design and consultations and discussions about the tattoo and other precautions and concerns are dealt with before the tattoo is ever decided upon. It's case by case. That's why I'm saying we need education, we hear all these stories about these frat house bros who just get drunk and walk into the nearest tattoo parlor wanting, "yolo" tatted on their armpit. So we assume tattoos are rash decisions. It's not all like that.

I think it's discriminatory to assume that this man has a lack of forethought just because he goes against the grain and has his whole body tattooed. You don't know anything about the process of how he got his tattoos or why he got his tattoos. It's just being assumed that one day he woke up saying, "yeahhh..I think i'll get my whole body tattooed today. For no reason at all but because I lack forethought and I'm rash!!"

Well, it would be impossible to get your whole body tattooed in one day sweatdrop just saying.

Exactly. I'm saying it took real dedication and commitment to go through with all that body ink. Not rash at all

I'd agree that it isn't rash. Possibly stupid and ill-informed, but no, not rash.

Why would it be stupid and ill-informed? I feel like that's an ill-informed assumption about this man.

[Agent Borealis]

ACRESONMYHOES

Well, you're a damn racist, then.

Yep. I've heard it before, doesn't make it true. I have plenty of black friends and I have the utmost respect for them.

ACRESONMYHOES

They didn't rob you because they were black, they robbed you because of their mental state, which can't be deduced from their ******** skin color.

Oh? And what makes you so confident in that proclamation?

ACRESONMYHOES

If you have a memory, you would maybe be able to look back and figure out what about their STANCE VOICE LANGUAGE and FACE could have tipped you off, but you're so blinded by the black fact that you probably don't even remember what happened clearly.

I love pissing off you cultish leftists. I seldom find a more satisfying thing to do on a boring friday afternoon.

ACRESONMYHOES

Or you didn't see them at all, in which case you may not even know they were black.
What specifically happened?

I was at a lake with some friends. I went to the end of the dock to hang out. Someone came up to me and asked if the black bag on the bench was mine (it was). And he said that the boy who was on the dock a moment ago was going through my bag, took out a wallet, grabbed the money in it and took off. I lost 40 dollars that day. I saw the boy when he was just sitting there, he was black. That doesn't mean that I think all black people are thieves but there is a relatively bad ghetto area a few miles away from my city. These neighborhoods are notorious for crime and are mostly black. I am reasonably certain that the child was from that area. And a few months after that my friend's bike was stolen right from where it was parked by two black kids. We later tracked the kids down, confronted them and intimidated them enough that they gave the bike back. It was quite satisfying.

[Sir Fharlanghn]

Mei tsuki7

Sir Fharlanghn

Mei tsuki7

Sir Fharlanghn

Because there is a tendency that people with tattoos are not as well off as a person without tattoos. There is many exceptions though.

Source for said tendency please. While there is a lot of jokes about being unable to make good money with tattoos it had not really been proven in any way, shape or form that I've seen.

Agent Borealis

If the majority of people with tattoos that the average person comes across is a trouble maker then its just the individual being intelligent. They are picking up on a pattern and then deducing the likely outcome. Sure they MIGHT be wrong but based on previous evidence they are more likely to be correct.

That is called anecdotal evidence and has no true scientific basis and is not true evidence. It is prejudice honestly but that doesn't mean it's not a normal human response.

I actually don't know anyone with a tattoo who is a troublemaker honestly.

Go talk to any business that requires you to dress well. They will tell you that they are more likely to hire people without tattoos than with tattoos. Go check who has sleeves of tattoos and who doesn't. Is it the people that live on 20k a year or 100k?

Ancedotal evidence is not proof. Here's my ancedotal evidence. I have a tattoo on my left inner wrist. I make just slightly less than the average household income in the US and I'm only a year and a half out of college. I work with two other people with tattoos, one with a half sleeve, who probably make at least twice what I do. So basically, my ancedotal evidence states that having tattoos does not effect how much you make.

O and the dress code for my job is business casual but we aren't required to cover up our tattoos.

You're really dense aren't you?

[Mei tsuki7]

Sir Fharlanghn

Mei tsuki7

Sir Fharlanghn

Mei tsuki7

Sir Fharlanghn

Because there is a tendency that people with tattoos are not as well off as a person without tattoos. There is many exceptions though.

Source for said tendency please. While there is a lot of jokes about being unable to make good money with tattoos it had not really been proven in any way, shape or form that I've seen.

Agent Borealis

If the majority of people with tattoos that the average person comes across is a trouble maker then its just the individual being intelligent. They are picking up on a pattern and then deducing the likely outcome. Sure they MIGHT be wrong but based on previous evidence they are more likely to be correct.

That is called anecdotal evidence and has no true scientific basis and is not true evidence. It is prejudice honestly but that doesn't mean it's not a normal human response.

I actually don't know anyone with a tattoo who is a troublemaker honestly.

Go talk to any business that requires you to dress well. They will tell you that they are more likely to hire people without tattoos than with tattoos. Go check who has sleeves of tattoos and who doesn't. Is it the people that live on 20k a year or 100k?

Ancedotal evidence is not proof. Here's my ancedotal evidence. I have a tattoo on my left inner wrist. I make just slightly less than the average household income in the US and I'm only a year and a half out of college. I work with two other people with tattoos, one with a half sleeve, who probably make at least twice what I do. So basically, my ancedotal evidence states that having tattoos does not effect how much you make.

O and the dress code for my job is business casual but we aren't required to cover up our tattoos.

You're really dense aren't you?

You're the one who, when asked for proof, gave none.

[ACRESONMYHOES]

Agent Borealis

ACRESONMYHOES

Well, you're a damn racist, then.

Yep. I've heard it before, doesn't make it true. I have plenty of black friends and I have the utmost respect for them.

ACRESONMYHOES

They didn't rob you because they were black, they robbed you because of their mental state, which can't be deduced from their ******** skin color.

Oh? And what makes you so confident in that proclamation?

ACRESONMYHOES

If you have a memory, you would maybe be able to look back and figure out what about their STANCE VOICE LANGUAGE and FACE could have tipped you off, but you're so blinded by the black fact that you probably don't even remember what happened clearly.

I love pissing off you cultish leftists. I seldom find a more satisfying thing to do on a boring friday afternoon.

ACRESONMYHOES

Or you didn't see them at all, in which case you may not even know they were black.
What specifically happened?

I was at a lake with some friends. I went to the end of the dock to hang out. Someone came up to me and asked if the black bag on the bench was mine (it was). And he said that the boy who was on the dock a moment ago was going through my bag, took out a wallet, grabbed the money in it and took off. I lost 40 dollars that day. I saw the boy when he was just sitting there, he was black. That doesn't mean that I think all black people are thieves but there is a relatively bad ghetto area a few miles away from my city. These neighborhoods are notorious for crime and are mostly black. I am reasonably certain that the child was from that area. And a few months after that my friend's bike was stolen right from where it was parked by two black kids. We later tracked the kids down, confronted them and intimidated them enough that they gave the bike back. It was quite satisfying.

I jumped to a lot of conclusions.

Are these the only times you've been robbed?

I don't have "ghettos" in my area (because it's a little town, not because I'm rich), so I forget that yeah, there's a lot of really poor black people in larger cities, and yeah, they steal.

You really can't deduce somebody's mental status from their skin's pigmentation, that's just factual, and I think it's pretty unlikely that them being black or you being white (or whatever you look like) was a genuine motivation to the kids stealing, maybe they thought you would p***y out because of it, but I'm pretty sure they just wanted money and a bicycle.

They way you were phrasing yourself was pretty confrontational, and that speaks to a lot of aggression surrounding the race issue, maybe you've just been hounded a lot about it, for which I'm tempted to believe the remedy is diplomacy in speech.

I went kind of nuts, but I'm not a cultist. lock your damn bike and have a little hope, people might not steal from people they respect in the first place.

[marshmallowcreampie]

duldol v3

I feel like there's some kind of clash between liberalism and expression in terms of art versus conservatism.

It's a matter of practicality. If you get tattooed in a society where having the tattoos gets you turned down for jobs, there's not much you can do about that. Most people today have no problems with tattoos but still expect them to be hidden, and a lot of employers that do allow you to have exposed tattoos still expect them to be tasteful. If you want a ton of tattoos, you'll need to be willing to sacrifice for that because there's really not much else you can do. It's not like you can sue for discrimination if you get turned down for a job because of your tattoo.

[Agent Borealis]

ACRESONMYHOES

I jumped to a lot of conclusions.

Obviously.

ACRESONMYHOES

Are these the only times you've been robbed?

Yes. I'm 18 years old.

ACRESONMYHOES

I don't have "ghettos" in my area (because it's a little town, not because I'm rich), so I forget that yeah, there's a lot of really poor black people in larger cities, and yeah, they steal.

I live in a rich upper class area but a few miles away from us are some poorer neighborhoods.

ACRESONMYHOES

You really can't deduce somebody's mental status from their skin's pigmentation, that's just factual, and I think it's pretty unlikely that them being black or you being white (or whatever you look like) was a genuine motivation to the kids stealing, maybe they thought you would p***y out because of it, but I'm pretty sure they just wanted money and a bicycle.

No but you can deduce patterns of behavior. For instance, [X]% of troublemakers in [THIS]school are black. If X is larger than 50% then it is more likely that you will be bullied by a black person. I would say that X is above 50 in certain areas for being robbed. I am talking about statistics and patterns.

ACRESONMYHOES

They way you were phrasing yourself was pretty confrontational, and that speaks to a lot of aggression surrounding the race issue, maybe you've just been hounded a lot about it, for which I'm tempted to believe the remedy is diplomacy in speech.

Yes I have been hounded a lot for it but I don't care that much. I only care about the truth and there are plenty of people in the world who don't want to see the truth. Some of the smartest people of all time have been hated for the ideas that they put forth, but it didn't make them wrong. It just took some time for smarter generations to appreciate them.

ACRESONMYHOES

I went kind of nuts, but I'm not a cultist. lock your damn bike and have a little hope, people might not steal from people they respect in the first place.

You went nuts because you were being judgemental and not thinking about my ideas, you were just reacting on impulse. It was my friend's bike, not mine and we got it back in the end.

[ACRESONMYHOES]

Agent Borealis

ACRESONMYHOES

I jumped to a lot of conclusions.

Obviously.

ACRESONMYHOES

Are these the only times you've been robbed?

Yes. I'm 18 years old.

ACRESONMYHOES

I don't have "ghettos" in my area (because it's a little town, not because I'm rich), so I forget that yeah, there's a lot of really poor black people in larger cities, and yeah, they steal.

I live in a rich upper class area but a few miles away from us are some poorer neighborhoods.

ACRESONMYHOES

You really can't deduce somebody's mental status from their skin's pigmentation, that's just factual, and I think it's pretty unlikely that them being black or you being white (or whatever you look like) was a genuine motivation to the kids stealing, maybe they thought you would p***y out because of it, but I'm pretty sure they just wanted money and a bicycle.

No but you can deduce patterns of behavior. For instance, [X]% of troublemakers in [THIS]school are black. If X is larger than 50% then it is more likely that you will be bullied by a black person. I would say that X is above 50 in certain areas for being robbed. I am talking about statistics and patterns.

ACRESONMYHOES

They way you were phrasing yourself was pretty confrontational, and that speaks to a lot of aggression surrounding the race issue, maybe you've just been hounded a lot about it, for which I'm tempted to believe the remedy is diplomacy in speech.

Yes I have been hounded a lot for it but I don't care that much. I only care about the truth and there are plenty of people in the world who don't want to see the truth. Some of the smartest people of all time have been hated for the ideas that they put forth, but it didn't make them wrong. It just took some time for smarter generations to appreciate them.

ACRESONMYHOES

I went kind of nuts, but I'm not a cultist. lock your damn bike and have a little hope, people might not steal from people they respect in the first place.

You went nuts because you were being judgemental and not thinking about my ideas, you were just reacting on impulse. It was my friend's bike, not mine and we got it back in the end.

Well if you want to deal with statistics and facts, we can deal with those, but I don't want to know where you live.
What you're dealing with here is anecdotal evidence that leads you to suspect that more than 50% of troublemakers are black, which I think is a dumb, dumb thing to say about any sample group you haven't fully tested.
But yeah, obviously I was acting on impulsem that's what going nuts is, and it was in reaction to your tone. It was late, and I'm pretty full of hatred in general, not just at people who I percieve as bigots.
You are not one of the smartest people of all time. I still think you're a little racist, but not so much as I did before, So yay! I learned a valuable thing about my own biases, too, so yay!
It's a fallacy to attempt to deduce someone's behavior from their skin pigment, as is perpetuates (buzz) the cycle (buzzz) of ignorance (buzzzz) that puts people of different skin tones in opposition to each other. <this principle really only applies to this specific issue, it's not analogous to anything, such as tattoos, which are a choice and thus are valid predictors of behavior because they require previous behavior to have come into existence.

[Sir Fharlanghn]

Mei tsuki7

Sir Fharlanghn

Mei tsuki7

Sir Fharlanghn

Mei tsuki7

Source for said tendency please. While there is a lot of jokes about being unable to make good money with tattoos it had not really been proven in any way, shape or form that I've seen.



That is called anecdotal evidence and has no true scientific basis and is not true evidence. It is prejudice honestly but that doesn't mean it's not a normal human response.

I actually don't know anyone with a tattoo who is a troublemaker honestly.

Go talk to any business that requires you to dress well. They will tell you that they are more likely to hire people without tattoos than with tattoos. Go check who has sleeves of tattoos and who doesn't. Is it the people that live on 20k a year or 100k?

Ancedotal evidence is not proof. Here's my ancedotal evidence. I have a tattoo on my left inner wrist. I make just slightly less than the average household income in the US and I'm only a year and a half out of college. I work with two other people with tattoos, one with a half sleeve, who probably make at least twice what I do. So basically, my ancedotal evidence states that having tattoos does not effect how much you make.

O and the dress code for my job is business casual but we aren't required to cover up our tattoos.

You're really dense aren't you?

You're the one who, when asked for proof, gave none.

Tell me, what type of person would fund a study that discriminates against people with tattoos? Please, just look at more than two people for your own conclusions.

[Agent Borealis]

I think in some areas white people are probably the majority of troublemakers. I'm not saying the standard is set for the entire world, different cities have different kinds of people. Some cities have more black people, others have more white people. Some cities have a large lower class population and a small upper-class population etc. It varies.

ACRESONMYHOES

You are not one of the smartest people of all time.

You don't even know who I am.

ACRESONMYHOES

I still think you're a little racist

Okay I'm racist in whatever way you subjectively perceive "racism". Whoopy

ACRESONMYHOES

It's a fallacy to attempt to deduce someone's behavior from their skin pigmen

You're thinking about it in a closed way. It isn't specifically the skin pigment that causes it, the skin color could just be a shared characteristic. But again, it really depends on what area we're talking about.