|
|
|
|
|
vhdc
|
Joined: 7/18/2006
Msg: 51 | |
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/3/2007 9:30:15 PM | bikerman:
sources (only a few thousand) I tend to go with with the educational sources (they tend to be more reliable. Wikipedia is fun.
The Smithsonian, and a few hundred universities the information is endless. Crystalinks specifically discusses eastern Europeans (early) tattoo's.
http://www.smithsonianmagazine.com/issues/2007/january/tattoo.php
http://www.msu.edu/~krcmari1/individual/history.html
http://www.amonline.net.au/bodyart/tattooing/earliest.htm (Australian Museum online)
http://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-584263/tattoo
http://tribes.tribe.net/heathen-hearth/thread/c364a898-d589-466c-9e62-a03fc0b8278a
http://www.crystalinks.com/tattoo.html
The tramp stamp you talk of was originated in Egypt (to expose ones sensuality) B.C. We just **stardize it (I only use the royal we to be kind). | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/3/2007 9:37:41 PM |
that getting a tattoo involves pain, and therefore isn't "feminine".
yea and giving birth involves pain to.. I guess that isn't all that feminine either.. 
Men just amaze me sometimes.. LOLOL | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/3/2007 9:45:32 PM |
people should relize that after a few years.those wonderful colors and pictures eventually turn to a grey unrecognizable blatch of skin....
My oldest tattoo is now 17 years old and it looks exactly the same as the day I got it.
If people get quality work done by a reputable artist the tattoo should look good forever.
Are you thinking of some old grampas you've seen that got their work done during WW2?
Tattooing equipment and inks have come a long way since then.
Addressing the "fad" aspect of the discussion.. like I said above, I got my first work done 17 yrs ago. I have had a lot done since then. I get it for me, because I like it. Not to fit in with my peers. I mean really, I'm 40 years old. Do you think I care? | |
|
| |
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/3/2007 9:54:44 PM | i think its gross.... ive always hated them but hey are popular i will say that.. its hard to meet people without them but idc i wont date a girl with them..it might look good now but when she is old it will be gross.. its all about the contrast and i think thats what draws people to them however a naked body looks better without them,IMHO
just myt two [pennies | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/3/2007 9:55:40 PM | I personally do not find it a turn on. Quite the opposite actually. But ... to each their own. Its your body. However, tattoos can be a danger to some people and those with the lower back tattoos may have problems if an epidural is required for any number of reasons, such a child birth or venous repair. If you have a system that is compromised by something, such as asthma or high allergy levels or types, a tattoo could cause complications. Then there is the oldest reason of all ..... both genders have the same problem ..... they have matured and just don't want them anymore or they find they can not get that dream job because they don't put the right presence forward ..... and it is very costly and very painful to get rid of and you actually never realy get rid of it except when its cut off. Lazers just mask any removal....a bad sunburn could bring it back out. Scraping is just surface scar tissue, That tat is still there.
Consider all the options and one should make their own decision and never regret it. You would be the one that has to live with it. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/3/2007 10:08:55 PM | hi i jsut skimmed the thread and may have missed someone saying the same thing as i am now so if thats the case sorry. my two cents is that tattoos are an art form. people get them for different reasons and therefore you cant look at someone with them and judge them in an accurate way (pertaining their tattoos dont spell out things you are against)
conformity, fadism and femininity seem to be the main issues addressed in this thread. it is well known that some people with tattoos have gang involvement, incarseration, etc, however that is not the case for everyone with tattoos.
as far as tattoos being a fad, western tattoos have been around since the 1700s, fads usually last a few months. the history of tattoos is quite interesting, in particular how many of the first techniques, colours, positioning have been emalgemated into modern tattoos.
im not sure how tattoos in general are masculine, doesnt that depend upon the art, not the act; afterall, this is 2007 and females have come a long way. hell, ive known guys who have donned themselves in more feminine tattoos such as flowers, cute birds, goddeses, etc yet they retain their masculinity. so why is it that when a woman gets a tattoo of say, a sailboat, a pin up girl, a star, etc that she has lost her feminity? if anything, the person makes the art a part of them (provided it is quality work) so perhaps some of you who oppose tattoos on women should take a look at where you are forming your opinion from. sometimes beliefs shut us out from learning new things. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/3/2007 10:19:46 PM | | Ok, I'm obviously not a man either, but I'll throw my comment in here. I have one tattoo that I just got about a year ago. It is my childrens' names done in a thin small solid black font that goes around my wrist with each name separated by a tiny heart. I wanted something that would be very simple. I love it, it means something very special to me, and I've only gotten positive reactions from it. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 1:07:03 AM | | yer an ass...i have a tattoo...it covers a big scar. I was stabbed when i was 13...i was saving my mom from being stabbed to death. I had over 600 sutures to put three layers of skin back together. I only recently got my tattoo, 23 yrs later, I wanted to be sure i got the right one...I wanted one to hide my scar. U c in the summer...when i wore a bikini...people would always ask...what happened there...i was tired of always being reminded of that awful day and all the memories that came with it. So, do i belong in a cirus...or...r u just a complete ass. Id say the later of the two. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 3:43:14 AM | | Guys face it, you better accept it. Now I wanna hear from the women who won't date guys with tattoos. I know there are alot out there, so speak up because there is no way this is a one sided deal. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 6:37:03 AM | i think it's for the most part just peoples tastes....some people like women in skirts showing off a well turned ankle and nice legs, while other men want someone looking good in bluejeans and hiking boots with an ivory skin complexion
me personally, big time turnoff...and almost definitely a dealbreaker...a little devil or something down at the ankle, or behind the ear ok fine...but a great big american eagle across the back...yukk...same goes for earrings thru the nose, the mouth or what have you...
just my opinion | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 7:30:38 AM | am i an ass? well i just gave my opinion...
by the way, you should have looked at my profile before you make such close minded assumptions.... i have many scars including the big one on the side of my face that you can see in my pic. and thats just my opinion and you have yours so dont insult me for it.. i think your being the ass. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 8:42:10 AM |
Of particular interest, in response to your query, Bikeman...The Danes, Norse, Saxons, Gauls, and Teutons all had traditions of tattooing that focused on family and tribal symbols. My family is not of a pagan and/or tribal culture. Most of western civilization has Christianity as its foundation.
So tattoos on women in this age is nothing new, and certainly nothing to be put off by, at least IMHO. not that i'm necessarily put off by them, but i recognize that tattoos are NOT a part of traditional western culture. the origin of tattoos is outside of Christianity and traditional western culture.
Crystalinks specifically discusses eastern Europeans (early) tattoo's. i haven't checked VHDC's sources. is this history of eastern european tattoos pre- or post- Christianity? my guess is it's pre-Christianic and therefore pagan in nature.
The tramp stamp you talk of was originated in Egypt (to expose ones sensuality) B.C. traditional egyptian culture isn't directly related to modern western civilization, is it?
please don't paint me as a Bible thumper, but just displaying here (thank you to others providing the research to prove it) that the origin of tattoos is OUTSIDE of general western civilization. which doesn't mean anything really to me personally. tattoos as we are talking about them here are a current fad that has some pretty long legs so far, but my guess is that they are a fad, nothing personal. get as many as you want! get a whole sleeve of them if that floats your boat. | |
|
vhdc
|
Joined: 7/18/2006
Msg: 64 | |
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 9:32:00 AM | bikeman:
There is no qualifications to history it is just that, the history of tattoo's. Yes, Egyptian culture had/has dictated ALL CIVILIZATION . You can continue to argue the facts that are not in question here (well only for you ), you asked me to site my sources and I have (soon I will be reading "What is *is*). | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 9:47:02 AM | actually this is not true because early christians did carry tatoos on there hands to symbolize there faith. this was a technique like drawing a fish in the sand and it was a small one right between there thumb anf first finger. anyway good day! if anyone has more info on this i would be appreciative as im interested in it.. | |
|
| |
| |
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 10:07:51 AM | | I tattoos are an art form, yes pain is involved(from what i hear). I don't have one ,but have been considering getting one. If a woman has a tattoo and i like her/she likes me...that's OK with me! | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 10:10:30 AM |
Egyptian culture had/has dictated ALL CIVILIZATION hmm christianity has got both judaic and roman influences on it; i don't think there has been a substantial egyptian stamp on historic christian tenets; didn't the romans conquer the egyptians?; and i'm pretty sure there aren't many tattoo rites in judaism (a jew would be better to answer that i suppose).
so i don't see a direct link between ancient egyptian civilization and today's modern western civilization fad of women placing tattoos on their lower backs--i'm missing the connection.
i'll read up on the eastern european tattoo links. nothing wrong with being better educated.
actually this is not true because early christians did carry tatoos on there hands to symbolize there faith. perhaps, but the romans sort of undid much of the this when they adopted christianity as their state religion. maybe there are tattoo rituals in orthodox christianity? i'm no religious expert, but the foundation of western civ is with the romans, who adopted christianity, modified it into roman catholicism, and most western christian religions use catholicism as its basis.
i've never had someone display their tattoos to me and say "hey i got this one because of ancient christian tattoo rituals". i'm sure someone has got these tattoos, but i'll bet they constitute practically 0.01% of all tattoos people get. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 10:19:17 AM | Get me started on the what's 'feminine' issue . . . lordy here we go . . before you say it, I'm not THAT OLD, by the way.
While I was growing up women weren't allowed on the golf course unless in the clubhouse and accompanied by their husbands - I guess it isn't FEMININE to GOLF. .
Women weren't allowed to vote for many centuries. I guess it isn't FEMININE to VOTE.
Women weren't allowed in many realms of work, armed forced, police, firefighters (and still get abused in some of these roles, quite publicly) and others until very recently. I guess it isn't FEMININE to WORK.
Maybe you get the point? If not, let's consider other parts of the world where women aren't allowed to walk with a man but must keep paces behind him. Or can't show their face in public blah blah blah. Now get the point? And let's not mention pain and the relation to childbirth even. It's not feminine to feel PAIN??????? Fnhell
It's just a tattoo. I have one and no I don't like everyone's and I don't care if everyone likes mine. I expected never to get one because everyone else was doing it but one day, literally, woke up and knew what I wanted and where to put it. That's all there is too it. Personal choice and execution of the right we have to do what we want to ourselves, instead of what people think we should. The first tattoo shop told me they wouldn't do it by the way so even tattoo artists try to control the industry. Of course the next one took my money willingly.
I saw a profile from my neck of the woods a while ago that said . . "No Tattoos, I want a woman who is clean from the start!" I just have to laugh and thank god I know right away not to contact that control freak. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 10:38:34 AM | I personally don't care if a woman has tats or not. If they do why not enjoy the art? If you really like it why not ask why she choose that particular piece of art?
I'm 21 and I have 2 tats, my first one was taken from an album's artwork of a favourite band...to me it symbolizes how music in general affects me (and no I'm not into the arts at all). My 2nd tat is a wolf. I got this done because a) they are by far my favourite animal and b) a wolf is able to survive in both a group and as a lone individual which is an attribute that I myself would always hope to have.
Do I plan on getting more? Yes, at the moment I'm designing a half sleeve tat and also a full calf one. Will I put just anything on my body? No, each picture I decide to put is something that I can link to something about myself, be it an event or a specific attribute that I wish to attain.
If there is a current "fad" in tattooing then it has to be the recent surge in tribal art. Things like the tribal band across the arm for guys and a tribal design on the lower back for girls. Are all of these done without personal reason? I doubt it, but everyone has to acknowledge that there will always be people that will do something dumb just to fit in. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 11:47:52 AM | IMHO tattoos are a personal expression...no different than deciding on a hair style or make up or what clothes to wear.
I have one tattoo...I got it as a birthday present from my daughter just a few years ago. Its a small one on my ankle.
Im planning on getting another one when I find the perfect one. I want a phoenix rising...I like what it symbolizes...rising out of the ashes.
I have no problem with anyone not wanting to date me because of tattoos.
If people need a reason..I guess thats as good as any!
| |
|
vhdc
|
Joined: 7/18/2006
Msg: 73 | |
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 12:09:13 PM | Taken from Crystalinks:
The British Royal Court must have been fascinated with the Tahitian chief's tattoos, because the future King George V had himself inked with the 'Cross of Jerusalem' when he traveled to the Middle East in 1892. He also received a dragon on the forearm from the needles of an acclaimed tattoo master during a visit to Japan. George's sons, The Duke of Clarence and The Duke of York were also tattooed in Japan while serving in the British Admiralty, solidifying what would become a family tradition.
Taking their sartorial lead from the British Court, where Edward VII followed George V's lead in getting tattooed; King Frederick IX of Denmark, the King of Romania, Kaiser Wilhelm II, King Alexander of Yugoslavia and even Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, all sported tattoos, many of them elaborate and ornate renditions of the Royal Coat of Arms or the Royal Family Crest. King Alfonso of modern Spain also had a tattoo.
Tattooing spread among the upper classes all over Europe in the nineteenth century, but particularly in Britain where it was estimated in Harmsworth Magazine in 1898 that as many as one in five members of the gentry were tattooed. There, it was not uncommon for members of the social elite to gather in the drawing rooms and libraries of the great country estate homes after dinner and partially disrobe in order to show off their tattoos. Aside from her consort Prince Albert, there are persistent rumours that Queen Victoria had a small tattoo in an undisclosed 'intimate' location; Denmark's king Frederick was filmed showing his tattoos taken as a young sailor. Winston Churchill's mother, Lady Randolph Churchill, not only had a tattoo of a snake around her wrist, which she covered when the need arose with a specially crafted diamond bracelet, but had her nipples pierced as well. Carrying on the family tradition, Winston Churchill was himself tattooed. In most western countries tattooing remains a subculture identifier, and is usually performed on less-often exposed parts of the body. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 12:42:19 PM | bike_man: If you want to say that tats aren't a part of western Christian tradition, I won't argue with you, but don't say that all those northern and western pagan peoples weren't a part of western civilization. In fact, were it not for the Celts, the Romans would never have become more then some chumps who ruled one city in Italy. When the Celts sacked Rome, the Romans changed from the Greek style phalanx to the maniples. They got their metallurgy from the Celt-Iberians during the time of Hannibal. Their helmets are of a Gaullic design. Chainmail was invented by the Celts. So you see, without the pagan tribes influence there would have been no Roman empire since they got all their equipment and tactics from those peoples who appariently aren't a part of western civilization.
On topic, physically I don't really care if a woman has tats or not, but mentally those women with them are more likely to be open minded so I tend to like women with tats for that reason. | |
|
| q for the guys--Tattoos on women--yes or no?
Posted: 4/4/2007 12:54:44 PM | Hey VHDC, I was reading your links, very informative!
Basically I learned tattoos are frowned upon by the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faiths. Romans had used tattoos primarily to mark slaves and criminals. The Roman soldiers sometimes got tattoos. Tattos were not really commonly used in the Roman empire in a tribal or familial sense. After the Romans adopted Christianity as their state religion, they too frowned upon tattoos as well.
I came across the reference you just noted. Basically the only people in British culture adopting tattoos were the aristocracy, elite, and members of certain industries (sailors, craft workers and such). The gentry in Britain did not make up a major proportion of their society, and even then only 1/5 of the gentry had them. Mostly I suppose to have a conversation piece at the cricket club locker room (hey Winchester, look at this! Why Brittingham, that marking is absolutely smashing!)
Females were a small percentage of tattoo-carriers until recently. I suppose it is true, there isn't anything man can do that a woman can't do!  | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 35
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 |
|
Home
login 
