To Tattoo Or Not To Tattoo

[Canada_First]

Everyone has the right to do whatever they want to their bodies.

But just like with free speech, people should be allowed to judge other for their decisions.

People who put "artwork" on their face or chest, or parts of their body that aren't discreet don't do anything for me. I don't get, for the life of me, why any woman would tattoo their chest. Or any man would but a tattoo on their neck.

Also the price is something I don't get. I have contemplated putting a meaningful tattoo on my shoulder but not at the price tag of $300 plus. Either young people have a lot more disposable income than I though or they're spending money they don't have on body art. Either way I have to question the judgement of a person with lots of tattoos.

300 is cheap. A shoulder piece can easily cross 1000 depending on the amount of detail and size. Most people go and get a little bit done every couple months or so. Sit for 2 to 4 hours at a time up to a max of 6. 6 hours is a lot of chair time.

I don't have neck tattoos. I cut it off at my shirt line basically. No neck and no hands. I may one day but not yet. I like to be sure they can be covered by a shirt.

Some people have careers that it doesn't matter. Like construction.

[Boges]

Member LesActive's informative post has actually made me think I'd never want one. I love being in the Sun. I don't know if I'll always be at a stable weight (I weight lift). I don't want to spend $1000 on body art.

Like with any lifestyle choice, I'll have preconceived opinions on people with tattoos. I, however, see some people that have really cool tattoos.

I hope we never see a time where it's socially unacceptable to have less than stellar opinions of people who are heavily tattoo'd. If you choose to look that way you have to accept that others may not like to look at you. This is the same with obesity BTW.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Boges

[August1991]

Everyone has the right to do whatever they want to their bodies.

But if you do so, you are stating to the world what you are.

Catholics wear a cross. Jews circumcise their males. Americans speak loud English. Hockey fans wear caps.

====

If you do any of this, you (as an individual) are identifying yourself.

Why do individuals do this? In which club are you a member? The "tattoo club" or the "non-tattoo club"?

Edited June 26, 2015 by August1991

[Boges]

But if you do so, you are stating to the world what you are.

Catholics wear a cross. Jews circumcise their males. Americans speak loud English. Hockey fans wear caps.

====

If you do any of this, you (as an individual) are identifying yourself.

Why do individuals do this? In which club are you a member? The "tattoo club" or the "non-tattoo club"?

For sure. Those aren't exclusive groups BTW. I'm circumcised, but not Jewish. I wear baseball caps but could give or take hockey.

People get tats for personal reasons in areas you can always see.

It's people who choose to have tattoos that can't be hidden that are asking for judgement.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Boges

[August1991]

People get tats for personal reasons in areas you can always see.

True, but when an individual gets a tattoo - they are telling the world what they are.

====

My question is more subtle. How do we identify (think of) ourselves?

People with tattoos view themselves as, well, people with tattoos. And Americans view themselves as, well, Americans. If I say something critical of tattoos, or Americans, most individuals of either group take my comment as an insult.

This seems to me to be, well, LINK

Edited June 26, 2015 by August1991

[LesActive]

The old adage holds true: The only real difference between those with tattoos and those without is that those with tattoos don't care that you don't have any.

I turn away many people who aren't ready to have certain areas illustrated. Hands, necks and faces are the no-go zones for clear skins but if you're over 60 and have already lived a full life I'm pretty sure you're mature enough to decide for yourself. If, however, you come in at 18 years of age and want your boyfriends name tattooed across your neck as your first one (or even your fifth or sixth one if you don't have at least your forearms covered) then I'm going to talk you out of it. There are many shops that would do that tattoo to get money out of you and then there are those with a strong sense of ethics and responsibility who would rather you have no regrets about the placement of your design.

The stigma of being marked is still strong in this society. Indeed. people judge me all the time and I admit that I asked for it. Not specifically, mind you but that is the effect. I am by no means into extreme modification. I know people who have done things to themselves that would make people on this board wretch in disgust. Compared to scarification, hanging from hooks, amputation, gunshots and branding, tattooing is kinda tame in the body mod arena. A few years ago I visited my hometown (pop. 4200) and was immediately ostracized for the ring in my septum (between the nostrils). However, because that town is no longer part of my community their judgements meant very little to me. So, go ahead, judge away! It's because of this stigmatization that when I finish a piece on virgin skin I often tell them that they are now one of us...one of us...one of us and to be prepared to witness old ladies fainting and children running away from you screaming. They don't seem to mind.

There is a certain confidence required of the individual before they get tattooed. It is about commitment after all. They know that they will judged. The overly self conscious will never mark themselves. Those that realize that life is not a forever deal have few issues with the idea of 'permanent' marks. They aren't forever, you'll rot eventually.

[Civis Romanus sum]

One of the universal traits of beauty is clear, unblemished skin - of whatever hue. Marring that with ugly looking blotches of fading ink is one of the dumbest things anyone can do, especially a woman. There is a reason those popular tattoos at the small of the back became known as 'tramp stamps' and you can see them in porn videos and at strip clubs all the time. Women who get such tattoos tend to be more slatternly than other women. The tramp stamps are an advertisement of their sexual availability and their desire for sexual attention.

[LesActive]

One of the universal traits of beauty is clear, unblemished skin - of whatever hue. Marring that with ugly looking blotches of fading ink is one of the dumbest things anyone can do, especially a woman. There is a reason those popular tattoos at the small of the back became known as 'tramp stamps' and you can see them in porn videos and at strip clubs all the time. Women who get such tattoos tend to be more slatternly than other women. The tramp stamps are an advertisement of their sexual availability and their desire for sexual attention.

ahahahaha, that's pure gold! Do you have any more?

[August1991]

The old adage holds true: The only real difference between those with tattoos and those without is that those with tattoos don't care that you don't have any.

I turn away many people who aren't ready to have certain areas illustrated. Hands, necks and faces are the no-go zones for clear skins but if you're over 60 and have already lived a full life I'm pretty sure you're mature enough to decide for yourself.

LesActive, this is a remarkable comment.

Most people identfy themselves through birth, their parents, ancestors. (Think of Native Canadians.) But you, in effect, are saying that mature people can choose to be members of a different "tribe".

[LesActive]

LesActive, this is a remarkable comment.

Most people identfy themselves through birth, their parents, ancestors. (Think of Native Canadians.) But you, in effect, are saying that mature people can choose to be members of a different "tribe".

I suppose you could interpret it that way and certainly many do it just for that reason (rejection of the old you) but in general I would see it as an addition of their own choice to the standard identifiers you highlight. Like I mentioned earlier, family crests are very popular as are flags, map outlines of countries (some with flags in them), geo-coordinates, parents/kids names/portraits, relevant dates and etc. are reaffirmations. That's the more literal stuff and then there is representational imagery of their psyche that they want to put on display so they can be 'read'. It can be political, religious/spiritual (mandalas are very popular now), club affiliations, pop culture and of course nonsense. Many just want a little decoration.

While the outsider image is still an obvious, alluring element of tattooing in this society (the separatist tribalism you imply), there is also the growing ubiquity of tattoos that is just as quickly changing how they are accepted as it is driving those opposed to the idea of tattoos in 'polite' society further into their bunkers of disdain.

There is an hilarious FaceBook group called, "your tattoos make you a horrible mother" some here may want to check out. It's trollicious!

[Civis Romanus sum]

ahahahaha, that's pure gold! Do you have any more?

Tattoos are essentially graffiti. Most of them aren't very good, and almost none qualify as art. Nor is human skin an appropriate canvas. I know two women who have multiple tattoos. One got them because she hates how she looks, especially after babies gave her bad stretch marks. The other used to be a stripper.

Tattoos are mostly an expression of the rebellion of the young who all want to do what all their peers are doing so they'll win approval from them. lolz

Edited June 28, 2015 by Civis Romanus sum

[LesActive]

Tattoos are essentially graffiti. Most of them aren't very good, and almost none qualify as art. Nor is human skin an appropriate canvas. I know two women who have multiple tattoos. One got them because she hates how she looks, especially after babies gave her bad stretch marks. The other used to be a stripper.

Tattoos are mostly an expression of the rebellion of the young who all want to do what all their peers are doing so they'll win approval from them. lolz

I am in near full agreement with your first two sentences. There is bad graffiti and good graffiti. I've always considered tattooing to be a craft which very rarely reaches the level of art. But then, I'm an art snob. In 15 years of working I have yet to put 'art' on people, mostly because that's not my job. My job is to help people express themselves through their chosen imagery. For tattooing to be considered 'art' I would need to express myself but that is not what I'm being paid to do. I'm an art whore and it pays the bills. My own art work would not translate to human skin. You do know what 'commission' means, right?

So, you know two women who have tattoos, two. That's a rather incomplete survey of tattoo aficionados to make such broad assumptions as to the wearers intentions as you just did. People are much more complex than you give them credit for. But, hey, if you want to be judgy like that, that's your choice.

[Big Guy]

To LessActive - You appear to have a lot of experience in the field and the personality of the individuals. Do you see this tattooing popularity as having some longevity or is it a fad that will go the way of turned up collars, mullets and mini skirts?

[PrimeNumber]

To LessActive - You appear to have a lot of experience in the field and the personality of the individuals. Do you see this tattooing popularity as having some longevity or is it a fad that will go the way of turned up collars, mullets and mini skirts?

I can't speak for LessActive but tattooing is just going to get more and more popular in my opinion. The generation that thinks it's taboo is getting older and fading away, they no longer matter as much in a pop culture sense, they do not set trends anymore, they are not fashionable and their opinion on these things no longer matters. Sorry to say but it's true. Youth like tattooing, youth are comfortable with tattooing, workplaces are getting more comfortable with tattooing, 20-30 years down the road, tattooing may only be taboo in more highly professional workplaces, if at all.

[WestCoastRunner]

ahahahaha, that's pure gold! Do you have any more?

Sure he does. Check his post under 'The Nobel Prize' thread under sex and gender issues forum.

[LesActive]

To LessActive - You appear to have a lot of experience in the field and the personality of the individuals. Do you see this tattooing popularity as having some longevity or is it a fad that will go the way of turned up collars, mullets and mini skirts?

I have to agree with Prime. It's definitely not a fad. Certain design styles come and go (haven't done a 'tribal' armband in years, thankfully) but the notion of adorning the body with patterns has existed long before the establishment of so-called civilization and will likely continue for many millennia to come. You can change your clothes and cut your hair but tattoos are (basically) permanent. As with fashion choices, people will always be inspired by the acts of others.

Certain t.v. programs have helped demystify aspects of tattooing to the masses which has created a huge surge in popularity over the past ten years, but it has also given people a false or staged look into how the process works. The programs are heavily dramatized but that hasn't stemmed the tide.

[GostHacked]

Tattoos are not considered art? Granted many tattoos are simply ugly, (gang tats) but I have seen some that are really works of art. This one gal I saw a couple weeks ago had both her arms done. It was done in a softer style and pastel colours and looked more like a painting than a tattoo. I had to compliment her on the work and she was saying she had a very good artist and the work proves this person is in fact, a true artist. They are not tattoos this girl is going to regret anytime soon, simply awesome to look at.

Then again pretentious hipsters think this is art.

[LesActive]

Tattoos are not considered art? Granted many tattoos are simply ugly, (gang tats) but I have seen some that are really works of art. This one gal I saw a couple weeks ago had both her arms done. It was done in a softer style and pastel colours and looked more like a painting than a tattoo. I had to compliment her on the work and she was saying she had a very good artist and the work proves this person is in fact, a true artist. They are not tattoos this girl is going to regret anytime soon, simply awesome to look at.

Then again pretentious hipsters think this is art.

There's not much on this planet that is as subjective as personal views on art. I never said that tattooing couldn't reach the level of art, just that it's a very rare event when it does. Art is more than fine rendering of a given subject matter. There are thousands of people who can render well, there are relatively few who develop a unique voice. Artists who study the history of art soon learn that realism, photo or otherwise, is only the beginning and is part of the training to eventually express yourself through the marks that you make. If you were to look at Picasso's early work you would find an artist who is extremely sensitive to the vagaries of light and shadow, giving the viewers a near literal 2D interpretation of what he saw in 3D. That was his starting point and many would say that he regressed from there into child-like images. It's my opinion that he progressed from the point of illustration to developing his own vision into a realm well beyond that of mere craft. Art is never obvious, illustrations are obvious by necessity. Art is rarely easy. Not every pretty picture is art.

In the images above, the viewer may be required to put some work into thinking about what's going on. Is it representative? Is it symbolic? What does it remind you of? Why are they leaning against wall? Why are they on the floor and not hanging? What kind of yellow is that? What does yellow mean? What feelings do yellow and black juxtaposed evoke in you? There are dozens of other questions that the artist 'may' want you to consider. I'm not overly fond of the images above but I wouldn't brush them off so quickly merely because I don't understand them immediately.

People tend to like what they know. Artists can and do challenge what you know. Thank the impressionists.

[cybercoma]

For tattooing to be considered 'art' I would need to express myself but that is not what I'm being paid to do.

Ever have someone consult with you and say, "I want a tattoo, but I want you to do something that you want to do"? I've been considering that. Frankly, I think that's the last bastion of the old taboo. People accept tattoos now, but only if they have meaning. When someone says that it has no meaning or they simply got it because they like tattoos, people think they're either hiding something or just lying.

[LesActive]

Ever have someone consult with you and say, "I want a tattoo, but I want you to do something that you want to do"? I've been considering that. Frankly, I think that's the last bastion of the old taboo. People accept tattoos now, but only if they have meaning. When someone says that it has no meaning or they simply got it because they like tattoos, people think they're either hiding something or just lying.

I've had quite a few come in and actually say, "I want a tattoo. What should I get?" I usually suggest a spider web across the throat which, so far at least, has no takers. I did have one ask what I would put on her if I had free reign and I explained that it would take me getting to know her far too intimately for my, and likely her, comfort. It's very difficult to know what people like when you first meet them and it can take quite a bit of work to get to the point where we understand each other enough for me to get started on a design that will satisfy both of us. Funny thing, folks take this permanence thing seriously.

To have someone come in and ask me to do what I wanted on them is far too much of a gamble and potential waste of time for me to take. They're going to want to see the design before it's tattooed and they'll always have the option to decline. Like I mentioned earlier, my own artwork is not suitable for tattooing and I wouldn't waste the effort putting my personal ideas on a canvas with an opinion about what I'm doing and which has a relatively short life span. I could sneak a clause into the waiver claiming post mortem rights to the tattoo, I suppose. I think I prefer to stick to more inert mediums for my own thing. They don't bitch or fade.

Having a reason for getting a tattoo is a funny thing. I get asked why I have certain tattoos quite a bit and I quote nomeansno, because "nonsense is better than no sense at all". It's really no ones business why I get what I get nor is it my business to judge them on what they get, unless I find it offensive and don't wish to be associated with it. People are hung up on rationalizing everything in an effort to justify their actions when it's just a tattoo.

Your body is a temple, decorate the walls.......No Regerts.

Edited July 1, 2015 by LesActive

[sharkman]

I've had quite a few come in and actually say, "I want a tattoo. What should I get?" I usually suggest a spider web across the throat which, so far at least, has no takers. I did have one ask what I would put on her if I had free reign and I explained that it would take me getting to know her far too intimately for my, and likely her, comfort.

And that, my friend, is creepy. Definitely creepy.

I know a few who have tattoos. One guy is going through a mid life crisis. He's had printed in large letters on his arm, the King only bows to his Queen. I am not making this up. He's got a lion's head and some other stuff too. He keeps going back for more like an addict. It's kind of sad. Another I know put one on his ankle and now said he's wouldn't do it today. Other people love them, and it's their money and body, but in 30 years, they'll look like prison tats and the general public tends to shy away from people with visible tats. It's not judgement so much as simple discomfort.

[Big Guy]

From what I am reading it appears there are "tattooers" and there are tattoo artists. I guess it is like painters - you can hire someone to paint your house or you can hire someone to create a painting of your house. I assume also that it would depend on the client.

It reminds me of the client who walks into an antique book store. The clerk asks what is it that they are looking for. The client replies; "Something 8 inches by 6 inches, about 1 inch thick and in black if possible".

As to artists, I know a few who are well respected. They would be insulted if asked to "do" a painting with a particular theme or any other conditions. Artists do not "make", they "create" I have been told emphatically.

A problem I see with tattoos that are easily evident is that it may turn off prospective employers or hiring people to work with the general public. I know there are dress codes for certain positions. I wonder if obvious tattoos are criteria for turning someone down for a job or for dismissal?

Edited July 1, 2015 by Big Guy

[Canada_First]

Of course people judge by appearance. We'll some do however it's becoming more common for doctors lawyers and dentists to be tatted up nowadays.

Large debate between calling them tattooers and tattooists. Call them whatever they prefer.

[LesActive]

From what I am reading it appears there are "tattooers" and there are tattoo artists. I guess it is like painters - you can hire someone to paint your house or you can hire someone to create a painting of your house. I assume also that it would depend on the client.

It reminds me of the client who walks into an antique book store. The clerk asks what is it that they are looking for. The client replies; "Something 8 inches by 6 inches, about 1 inch thick and in black if possible".

As to artists, I know a few who are well respected. They would be insulted if asked to "do" a painting with a particular theme or any other conditions. Artists do not "make", they "create" I have been told emphatically.

A problem I see with tattoos that are easily evident is that it may turn off prospective employers or hiring people to work with the general public. I know there are dress codes for certain positions. I wonder if obvious tattoos are criteria for turning someone down for a job or for dismissal?

If a tattooer wants to call themselves an artist then, ok. Tattooist/tattooer/skin illustrator, whatever. All of us do commercial graphic design. Artists don't consider money when they create as that will influence how the work is done. Tattooers always consider the cost and aim to please their clients, both elements take the work out of the realm of art (imo) and bring into the realm of prostitution/crafting. If it's art it is a lesser form. Totally subjective though. How does the label, tattooerist work for you?

Certain tattoos are job killers and I will counsel against them if I think they aren't ready for them. I was tattooing for 14 years before I decided to have my hand tattooed but I will never be an employee again so it's not a regrettable thing for me.

[cybercoma]

Apt comparison. Tattooing is more graphic design than painting. Never thought of it that way before.

Edited July 1, 2015 by cybercoma