| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 1:21:54 PM | It's body art. Self expression, and self distinction.
Be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath. Distinction is a pretty thin rationalization for getting a tattoo, and I would question the motivations of anyone who got one for reasons of distinguishing their identity. Whether you have a tattoo, wear colored contacts or put a gold paper clip through your nose, it's not going to have an effect on who you are nearly as much as it will influence the way others see you. And while that may influence how they interact with you, it's not self-distinction. It's image projection.
Art, perhaps. Expression, sometimes. On the other hand, it may be no more artful or expresive than a billboard and no more distinctive than a uniform. As you say, it's a case-by-case basis, and it's a free country. The only reason that really means anything is the fact that you wanted one. No one has the right to fault you for that. They may try, but that's on them. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 2:15:32 PM |
I think people that simply generalize tats and piercings as "trashy" and "un-lady like" are holding onto old conventions a little too desperately. Times have changed.
Just because times have changed...Doesn't mean that they have changed for the best. | |
|
DÖÑ
|
Joined: 1/9/2008
Msg: 78 | |
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 7:15:59 PM |
Just because times have changed...Doesn't mean that they have changed for the best.
Complaining about people getting tattoo's is like complaining about people wearing blue shirts. It's all ornamentation and the side effect of anything we put on is to either fit in or distinct our selves. Except that tattoo's and piercings have a bit of pain involved. In many cultures it's a symbol of strength and courage and is not necessarily a modern thing.... Movement in any direction is progression. However I myself am glad I haven't gotten any tattoo's yet, I'm not into the same stuff I was 5 years ago. The permanence of a tattoo is a little scary to me, the pain not so much. I love piercings :) | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 7:56:22 PM |
Just because times have changed...Doesn't mean that they have changed for the best.
Well I feel when times change in support of freedom and personal liberty, then they are indeed changing for the best 
Tats and piercings are a form of artistic expression. I would hope we are all in agreement, whether we think they are ugly and or non-lady like, that women should have the choice. The freedom to express themselves in that way. And many ladies do choose to. Which in itself means the statement "non lady-like" is merely a convention of opinion, as clearly many ladies do it, clearly it's lady-like in the sense that it's 'like' our modern culture. To say it's non lady-like is holding onto outdated cultural views. For instance, women switching to jeans over dresses was regarded as non-lady like during that transition, no? How about women switching to thongs? Well they were all deemed slutty for a decade or so. But now it's so common most people don't think women are skanks for wearing thongs. Get enough women doing it, and it's a part of our culture. Tats and piercings are no different, and many women wear em. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:10:39 PM |
And while that may influence how they interact with you, it's not self-distinction. It's image projection.
I understand what you are saying and I agree. But it's inaccurate to generalize that tats are not a form of distinction. Sure they can be, and are for some. When a lady gets a tattoo of a playboy bunny on her neck...maybe not, but it depends on the 'whats' and 'whys' on a case by case. What about the women who designs it herself, and has meaning attached to the design? But hey, even when it's just image projection, what's wrong with that? As you said, our country is trying to support freedom. What about when a man throws on a Chicago Cubs hat? Is that distinction or image projection? Could be either I suppose? I think it's absurd for people to truly generalize women as having trashy characters when women have tats. If you **I am not saying you personally, speaking to the audience** don't like the way it looks then just express that, don't take it further and actually make judgment calls on that womens character. Just acknowledge the fact that the 'look' of it isn't your cup of tea.. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:22:12 PM |
It's all ornamentation and the side effect of anything we put on is to either fit in or distinct our selves.
Consider the point I made above regarding ornamentation vs. distinction.
In many cultures it's a symbol of strength and courage and is not necessarily a modern thing....
It's certainly not a modern thing, but let's try to keep this in perspective is all I'm saying. In the context of modern society, you'd have a difficult time convincing me that the average citizen deserves, let alone needs, a badge of strength or courage that the tattoos you're talking about symbolize. Likewise for the typical "tribal" or cultural symbols that are so trendy now.
Those representations don't exist in mainstream society. In the past, when those symbols really said something about the wearer, anyone with a tattoo who didn't earn the right to bear that symbol might very well have been killed as an imposter. Moreover, if you did belong to whatever tribe/group/sect your tattoo represented, you'd better have meant it because you could be killed for that, too. It was meant as a symbol of the most serious commitment. Even today. If you're not a U.S. Marine or a Hell's Angel, for example, try getting a USMC or HA tattoo and see what happens.
The average civilian with a few bucks to blow on a streetside tattoo parlor has absolutely no clue what they're messing with when they come up with that kind of story. If you want a tattoo - especially one that means something to you - fine, go get one. Just try not to blow smoke up people's butts about it. That's gross.  | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:45:57 PM |
But now it's so common most people don't think women are skanks for wearing thongs.
When she wears them to a funeral it's kinda inappropriate. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:48:28 PM | | Aye. But she shouldn't be wearing white pants to begin with lol | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:50:18 PM | | Actually I've had women wear white pants to funerals of my first kin. I was not happy at all. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:51:08 PM | As long as you are wearing a thong and no one sees it, it's no big deal. Even at a funeral. They eliminate the troublesome VPL.
However when they are showing above your hip hugger pants... now, that is skanky. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:51:27 PM | But it's inaccurate to generalize that tats are not a form of distinction....What about the women who designs it herself, and has meaning attached to the design?
I didn't generalize about "any" form of distinction, I was referring to what you said about self-distinction. Her tattoo is an image, unique as it may be. To actually distinguish herself, she would at least have to explain the meaning behind it. Then she begins to express herself. There is no distinction without meaning. Without meaning, she's just another person with a tattoo to the observer. And after the meaning for the tattoo is conveyed, the way someone interacts with her is based on who she is, with all her life's meaning behind her, and not the tattoo. The tattoo is just a reminder of that. That's why I say the tattoo doesn't distinguish her.
But hey, even when it's just image projection, what's wrong with that?
Nothing. I was just making the distinction. Pun intended. :)
What about when a man throws on a Chicago Cubs hat? Is that distinction or image projection? Could be either I suppose?
I suppose, but what does that distinguish about him other than that he's like any other Cubs fan?
I think it's absurd for people to truly generalize women as having trashy characters when women have tats.
I agree. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:52:31 PM |
As long as you are wearing a thong and no one sees it, it's no big deal. Even at a funeral. They eliminate the troublesome VPL.
I meant only a thong, as in beachwear. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:54:47 PM | | See.. you say it "is skanky" and not "it looks skanky". Judgment calls on the persons actual character and values all because they show parts of their thong?.. I personally don't see someone as skanky unless they sleep with a lot of random people. If someone shows off some of their thong, wears a see through shirt to show off their bra, etc.. yeah that will usually 'Look' skanky.. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:57:13 PM | | Hah! Well...I would say ive been going to the wrong funerals, and need to goto the ones you do apparently, but that would be odd of me to say.. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:58:34 PM |
See.. you say it "is skanky" and not "it looks skanky". Judgment calls on the persons actual character and values all because they show parts of their thong?.. I personally don't see someone as skanky unless they sleep with a lot of random people. If someone shows off some of their thong, wears a see through shirt to show off their bra, etc.. yeah that will usually 'Look' skanky..
So wearing a barely fitting blouse with one top button fastened, exposing one's stomach, while wearing shorts and grabbing one's penis only LOOKS skanky but is not skanky. Okay I get it. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 8:58:43 PM | | OK, a thong bathing suit might be a little much at a funeral. But people may feel free to wear what they want to mine. Except Crocs and Ugg boots. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:00:34 PM |
Hah! Well...I would say ive been going to the wrong funerals, and need to goto the ones you do apparently, but that would be odd of me to say..
You're free to come as long as you're not wearing just a thong. Cuz if you do there'll be more than just one stiff. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:01:58 PM |
OK, a thong bathing suit might be a little much at a funeral. But people may feel free to wear what they want to mine. Except Crocs and Ugg boots.
I'll be wearing a Babs Streisand t-shirt and playing her music during my eulogy of you. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:02:52 PM |
So wearing a barely fitting blouse with one top button fastened, exposing one's stomach, while wearing shorts and grabbing one's penis only LOOKS skanky but is not skanky. Okay I get it.
Actually, if I were the one getting my penis grabbed in that situation, "skanky" would probably not be the first word I thought about her.  | |
|
| Firegoat11
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:11:38 PM | | Okay, I understand what you're saying, fair enough. But in that light, nothing physical is "distinguishable" of a persons uniqueness when it comes to appearance. As nothing physical would have some inherent meaning, without the said person expressing it. But that's important. The tattoos may not have meaning to the random observer, but the women can express and elaborate with someone new as to the meaning the tattoo has, and therefore it then serves as self distinction. Such as the Cubs hat. To the random person it doesn't mean much more then "he must be a cubs fan", but if you communicate with that person you may find out it has life-long meaning that goes beyond him being a cubs fan. This all gives credence to the idea of not making judgment calls about the person based on appearance, before you actually know the person. *again not directing at you* Anyways, just cuz the tats don't express self-distinction inherently, doesn't mean it's not there! Maybe tats are great for this very reason... gives a motive for someone to initiate conversation, to find out what the self-distinction and meaning might be.. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:15:50 PM |
So wearing a barely fitting blouse with one top button fastened, exposing one's stomach, while wearing shorts and grabbing one's penis only LOOKS skanky but is not skanky. Okay I get it.
I would say that person is a perve at that point. Minus the penis grabbing, I would say he "looks skanky", correct
Of course that was a way sensationalized example compare to the scenario I was replying to.. which was a women showing parts of the thong above the hip... heh. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:17:04 PM | | Or you could grow a sense of humor, as I did when I took that photo =] | |
|
| Firegoat11
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:20:09 PM |
This all gives credence to the idea of not making judgment calls about the person based on appearance, before you actually know the person.
Sure, I agree. I'm just tryin' to support the strongest argument possible. :)
Maybe tats are great for this very reason... gives a motive for someone to initiate conversation, to find out what the self-distinction and meaning might be..
Well said. That would be a good thing. | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:35:13 PM | Or you could grow a sense of humor, as I did when I took that photo =]
I LOVE that photo and I think it shows you have an excellent sense of humor as I wrote in my profile review of you. I was only joking with you which is why I put that stupid little smiley face. You are fun and hilarious! | |
|
| Women & Tattoos
Posted: 4/27/2008 9:43:28 PM | *Wishes POF was webcam based** I hate it when I infer things that arn't there due to electronic communication limitations! Sorry  | |
|
Home
login 
