Woman Removed From Legoland For Tattoo

Was Legoland in the right or the wrong for kicking out this woman with a racy tattoo?

They were in the right.	65.6%	[ 99 ]
They were in the wrong.	19.9%	[ 30 ]
Indifferent/I don't know.	14.6%	[ 22 ]
Total Votes:			[ 151 ]

[The Living Force]

Princess Creampie

The Living Force

Mister George Kapland

The Living Force

Horace Burtons Ghost

Though, in some people's minds offensive.

It raises the issue though, if a toy company uses a 'current trend' like tattooing as a form of advertising, can they draw the line as to it's content. To the point of ejecting a paying customer. Would Lego have an issue and take back any of the product the woman purchased at the gift shop, or because she has an 'offensive' tattoo they assumed she 'shoplifted'? But they certainly take the moral high ground when it suits.

For example, the lego video games. Look ******** cute. I see no problem with a young kid playing the latest lego batman one, but would with Arkham asylum, essentially the same game.

I say this, but the only place I'd be thrown out of because of my ink, is a soy factory.

It's not because the woman had a tattoo. The tattoo was definitely inappropriateness for children. A nude Tinkerbell penetrating her genitals with a lightswitch? At eye level for kids? confused

I doubt you'd be thrown out of a soy factory, though. I can't tell, but is that white ink for the eyes and text? If so, aren't you worried about fading? OcO If not, disregard aaaaaall 'at.

it's only inappropriate to people who find such things inappropriate.

It's goddamned art,not good art. But you don't get tattoos to hide them. That's foolish.

Deep, George. Really deep.

Well, I tried to argue in court that having attractive genitals was justification for sharing them with the world but the judge wouldn't have it. In seriousness, though, I hide mine when they're inappropriate; nothing sexual, but I like getting jobs and all that. Context.

A few years back, I read a playboy article which detailed countless incidents of police pulling over street racing cars that had nudy vinyls, giving them a ticket, and them being ordered to remove it. And in the end, every judge ruled in favor of the street racer.

cool story

[Princess Creampie]

The Living Force

Princess Creampie

The Living Force

Mister George Kapland

The Living Force

Horace Burtons Ghost

Though, in some people's minds offensive.

It raises the issue though, if a toy company uses a 'current trend' like tattooing as a form of advertising, can they draw the line as to it's content. To the point of ejecting a paying customer. Would Lego have an issue and take back any of the product the woman purchased at the gift shop, or because she has an 'offensive' tattoo they assumed she 'shoplifted'? But they certainly take the moral high ground when it suits.

For example, the lego video games. Look ******** cute. I see no problem with a young kid playing the latest lego batman one, but would with Arkham asylum, essentially the same game.

I say this, but the only place I'd be thrown out of because of my ink, is a soy factory.

It's not because the woman had a tattoo. The tattoo was definitely inappropriateness for children. A nude Tinkerbell penetrating her genitals with a lightswitch? At eye level for kids? confused

I doubt you'd be thrown out of a soy factory, though. I can't tell, but is that white ink for the eyes and text? If so, aren't you worried about fading? OcO If not, disregard aaaaaall 'at.

it's only inappropriate to people who find such things inappropriate.

It's goddamned art,not good art. But you don't get tattoos to hide them. That's foolish.

Deep, George. Really deep.

Well, I tried to argue in court that having attractive genitals was justification for sharing them with the world but the judge wouldn't have it. In seriousness, though, I hide mine when they're inappropriate; nothing sexual, but I like getting jobs and all that. Context.

A few years back, I read a playboy article which detailed countless incidents of police pulling over street racing cars that had nudy vinyls, giving them a ticket, and them being ordered to remove it. And in the end, every judge ruled in favor of the street racer.

cool story

Well, actually what she did was kinda illegal. No one can view porn under the age of 18 in America. But that law is hardly enforced

[Old Blue Collar Joe]

Crylvia

Old Blue Collar Joe

Empress Goddess Queen

The park should make its rules clear although I do not agree with her having her tattoo exposed. I hope she sues and wins.

Which was probably her intention in the first place. She's a ******** moron and should be sterilized before she breeds again. 'Gee!! I have an ugly a** tattoo of Tinkerbell ******** a light switch. There's no way that's not considered vulgar and inappropriate for children! I'll go to a children's and family attraction and see how it goes over!!"
She has taken ignorant to places even the short bus doesn't travel.

Goddamn, Joe. I'm with you on this one, but does it really make you that mad?

Nah. Sometimes I just have a hard day at the office. One of my data services have been down for hours, which means I'll be working until two or three in the morning.

[Sergeant Pancakebatter]

The Living Force

Mister George Kapland

The Living Force

Horace Burtons Ghost

The Living Force

Horace Burtons Ghost

All a storm in a teacup if Lego corp allow their toys to be used to show how fine a point a pen can have. This example is from a design company ad campaign.

I am sure Lego like this type of 'tattoo' to further advertise their product, and may encourage the little ones to get inked themselves. With ink inappropriate in many venues.

What a storm in a tea cup. A 'play mobil' tea-cup at that.

That picture... is... awesome...

Though, in some people's minds offensive.

It raises the issue though, if a toy company uses a 'current trend' like tattooing as a form of advertising, can they draw the line as to it's content. To the point of ejecting a paying customer. Would Lego have an issue and take back any of the product the woman purchased at the gift shop, or because she has an 'offensive' tattoo they assumed she 'shoplifted'? But they certainly take the moral high ground when it suits.

For example, the lego video games. Look ******** cute. I see no problem with a young kid playing the latest lego batman one, but would with Arkham asylum, essentially the same game.

I say this, but the only place I'd be thrown out of because of my ink, is a soy factory.

It's not because the woman had a tattoo. The tattoo was definitely inappropriateness for children. A nude Tinkerbell penetrating her genitals with a lightswitch? At eye level for kids? confused

I doubt you'd be thrown out of a soy factory, though. I can't tell, but is that white ink for the eyes and text? If so, aren't you worried about fading? OcO If not, disregard aaaaaall 'at.

it's only inappropriate to people who find such things inappropriate.

It's goddamned art,not good art. But you don't get tattoos to hide them. That's foolish.

Deep, George. Really deep.

Well, I tried to argue in court that having attractive genitals was justification for sharing them with the world but the judge wouldn't have it. In seriousness, though, I hide mine when they're inappropriate; nothing sexual, but I like getting jobs and all that. Context.

Hell I cover mine all the time in some of my fashion choices. My tats aren't for anyone but myself. I didn't get them to show off, I got them because I like them

[The Living Force]

Sergeant Pancakebatter

The Living Force

Mister George Kapland

The Living Force

Horace Burtons Ghost

Though, in some people's minds offensive.

It raises the issue though, if a toy company uses a 'current trend' like tattooing as a form of advertising, can they draw the line as to it's content. To the point of ejecting a paying customer. Would Lego have an issue and take back any of the product the woman purchased at the gift shop, or because she has an 'offensive' tattoo they assumed she 'shoplifted'? But they certainly take the moral high ground when it suits.

For example, the lego video games. Look ******** cute. I see no problem with a young kid playing the latest lego batman one, but would with Arkham asylum, essentially the same game.

I say this, but the only place I'd be thrown out of because of my ink, is a soy factory.

It's not because the woman had a tattoo. The tattoo was definitely inappropriateness for children. A nude Tinkerbell penetrating her genitals with a lightswitch? At eye level for kids? confused

I doubt you'd be thrown out of a soy factory, though. I can't tell, but is that white ink for the eyes and text? If so, aren't you worried about fading? OcO If not, disregard aaaaaall 'at.

it's only inappropriate to people who find such things inappropriate.

It's goddamned art,not good art. But you don't get tattoos to hide them. That's foolish.

Deep, George. Really deep.

Well, I tried to argue in court that having attractive genitals was justification for sharing them with the world but the judge wouldn't have it. In seriousness, though, I hide mine when they're inappropriate; nothing sexual, but I like getting jobs and all that. Context.

Hell I cover mine all the time in some of my fashion choices. My tats aren't for anyone but myself. I didn't get them to show off, I got them because I like them

I don't mind if people see mine, but I don't go out of my way to show them off. Especially considering I get them in the professional zone.

[Olya]

Mister George Kapland

Olya

Mister George Kapland

Olya

Mister George Kapland

Ah the greeks and the Romans, two civilizations that nearly all their art was "pornographic"

So,yes.. I suppose?

It

Next time I'll try to comment a little closer to your head as opposed to over it.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

You're being vague. The city, the disaster, the art?

Are you implying the city of Pompeii was destroyed because of it's art?

Pompei was spared the vandalism that Rome and other cities were met with. That is why a lot of valuable artifacts are unearthed from it as well as from its sister city, Herculaneum.

Among the finds was a brothel where vivid graphic images of services rendered were depicted on the wall. Now, don't get me wrong, it is an extremely valuable find, but it is by no means "art." The only boundaries it pushes are those of depravity and human abuse. And yet much of Roman and Greek art was privately commissioned, much like their pornography. So, the sponsor is clearly not the tell-tale sign of whether we consider something "art" or "profanity."

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

I have no idea how I couldn't garner that from your initial post. :lmfao:

But that sorta harkens back to my "art is in the eyes of the beholder" thing, from earlier.

Although, who says art can't be graphic and sexual? I have to disagree that it cannot be.

I apologize. I seldom concern myself with the lack of education in others.

The difference between art and pornography is intent, theme, and meaning. I hope we need not argue what the intent, theme, and meaning of that tattoo was.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

[xXx Fanny Hill xXx]

I think the legoland employee's did the right thing. 8yr olds don't need to have that explained to them yet.

[Plata Plomo y Sangre]

Yes, legoland was within their rights to do what they did. Yes, it was an example of some pretty uptight douchebaggery, and I'll be protesting by ensuring I never go to legoland.

[The Sky Does Not Bow]

Tactical Leg Sweep

Yes, legoland was within their rights to do what they did. Yes, it was an example of some pretty uptight douchebaggery, and I'll be protesting by ensuring I never go to legoland.

you guys have some seriously weird metrics about what constitutes uptight douchebaggery. A crass, poorly-rendered image like that? At a place designed for children specifically? Yeah, inappropriate is the kindest thing you could say.

[Plata Plomo y Sangre]

The Sky Does Not Bow

Tactical Leg Sweep

Yes, legoland was within their rights to do what they did. Yes, it was an example of some pretty uptight douchebaggery, and I'll be protesting by ensuring I never go to legoland.

you guys have some seriously weird metrics about what constitutes uptight douchebaggery. A crass, poorly-rendered image like that? At a place designed for children specifically? Yeah, inappropriate is the kindest thing you could say.

Oh god, you mean children might see a flash of breasts? Stop the ******** presses, the world will collapse on itself. rolleyes A kid can ******** looking up a pair of tits and much more graphic images by a quick google search. I could understand not going out of your way to show a kid porn, but to say that a ******** TATTOO, which isn't even all that graphic considering you can't see the penetration (and thus since kids are in most cases ignorant about sex, won't even be able to conceptualize what the ******** is going on in the image) somehow warrants a mother and her child being kicked out is ******** stupid. Plain and simple. I refuse to give them business.

[The Sky Does Not Bow]

Tactical Leg Sweep

The Sky Does Not Bow

Tactical Leg Sweep

Yes, legoland was within their rights to do what they did. Yes, it was an example of some pretty uptight douchebaggery, and I'll be protesting by ensuring I never go to legoland.

you guys have some seriously weird metrics about what constitutes uptight douchebaggery. A crass, poorly-rendered image like that? At a place designed for children specifically? Yeah, inappropriate is the kindest thing you could say.

Oh god, you mean children might see a flash of breasts? Stop the ******** presses, the world will collapse on itself. rolleyes A kid can ******** looking up a pair of tits and much more graphic images by a quick google search. I could understand not going out of your way to show a kid porn, but to say that a ******** TATTOO, which isn't even all that graphic considering you can't see the penetration (and thus since kids are in most cases ignorant about sex, won't even be able to conceptualize what the ******** is going on in the image) somehow warrants a mother and her child being kicked out is ******** stupid. Plain and simple. I refuse to give them business.

That's a lot of rage for something trivial. It's not just breasts. The image is obscene, ******** deal with it.

[Plata Plomo y Sangre]

The Sky Does Not Bow

Tactical Leg Sweep

The Sky Does Not Bow

Tactical Leg Sweep

Yes, legoland was within their rights to do what they did. Yes, it was an example of some pretty uptight douchebaggery, and I'll be protesting by ensuring I never go to legoland.

you guys have some seriously weird metrics about what constitutes uptight douchebaggery. A crass, poorly-rendered image like that? At a place designed for children specifically? Yeah, inappropriate is the kindest thing you could say.

Oh god, you mean children might see a flash of breasts? Stop the ******** presses, the world will collapse on itself. rolleyes A kid can ******** looking up a pair of tits and much more graphic images by a quick google search. I could understand not going out of your way to show a kid porn, but to say that a ******** TATTOO, which isn't even all that graphic considering you can't see the penetration (and thus since kids are in most cases ignorant about sex, won't even be able to conceptualize what the ******** is going on in the image) somehow warrants a mother and her child being kicked out is ******** stupid. Plain and simple. I refuse to give them business.

That's a lot of rage for something trivial. It's not just breasts. The image is obscene, ******** deal with it.

Right, because if I use the word ******** I am clearly raging. The more you talk, the more I think you need to remove the stick out of your a**. Glad you admit it's trivial though.

If you think that it warrants someone being kicked out of a theme park you're a dumb douchebag (among a whole lot of other things in your specific case). Deal with it.

[Nonesuch Solo]

Mister George Kapland

Olya

This... Can't be the only place she'd been asked to vacate... It just can't.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

I know people with worse tattoos and they've never, ever, ever, been kicked out of anywhere based on their tattoos

To a great extent, getting in trouble for something "offensive" is only going to happen if somebody else whines about it; the people in charge are usually too busy to be on the lookout for "offensive" things. (For example, the local homeowner's society wouldn't give a s**t how long that car's been up on blocks in Joe's front yard if his neighbors didn't call and complain.) It's possible that your acquaintances have never actually offended other patrons in their travels--or said offended patrons were not offended enough to actually complain to management about it.

[The Sky Does Not Bow]

Tactical Leg Sweep

Right, because if I use the word ******** I am clearly raging. The more you talk, the more I think you need to remove the stick out of your a**. Glad you admit it's trivial though.

Yeah it's not like the things people write have tone or anything.

Quote:

If you think that it warrants someone being kicked out of a theme park you're a dumb douchebag (among a whole lot of other things in your specific case). Deal with it.

I imagine they were asked to cover it up first. Stop getting indignant.

[Plata Plomo y Sangre]

Quote:

Yeah it's not like the things people write have tone or anything.

Not like that's notoriously difficult to ascertain through text or anything.

Quote:

I imagine they were asked to cover it up first. Stop getting indignant.

Nowhere in the story does it say she was. Stop whining.