Right Thinking From The Left Coast
Don't stay in bed, unless you can make money in bed. - George Burns

Ink
by Lee

Point of discussion: chicks with tattoos.  Am I the only one that doesn’t like tattoos on girls?  I don’t mind one or two little, feminine ones.  But the trend today for females is for these big, gaudy tattoos on arms and calves and necks.  I think this looks pretty repulsive on women.  And don’t even get me started on piercings.

Any of you guys out there dig ink on chicks?  Can you explain it to me?

Update: What got me interested in posting this was last night I went to the supermarket to buy some soda, and there was a girl in line ahead of me.  Cute chick, looked pretty normal, about college age, almost looked like a sorority type.  Except her entire right arm was covered in a tattoo.  She was sleeved.  She didn’t look like she was into the hardcore tattoo scene, she looked like a gal who made a really bad decision.  And I was just curious if there was anyone out here who liked this sort of thing, and if so, could you explain the appeal.

Posted by Lee on 05/31/05 at 02:33 AM (Discuss this in the forums)

Comments


Posted by Aaron - Free Will on 05/31/05 at 03:41 AM from United States

I’m with you all the way.

Posted by Pat Meebles on 05/31/05 at 04:07 AM from United States

I guess you’re noticing all of the girls who are into hardcore. Since I grew up on that culture, I actually like it, but know where you’re coming from.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:22 AM from Canada

Could be the HOTTEST chick and as soon as I see the tat….. VOMIT.  She may as well be Roseanne Barr

Posted by Lee on 05/31/05 at 04:25 AM from United States

Well, there’s always been a hardcore subculture, even back in the 80s.  Girls who were really into ink as a form of body art, that sort of thing.  But these days the girls getting these big tattoos are less into the whole tattoo lifestyle than they are girls who view a large tattoo as a fashion accessory.  So it’s always been kinda cool and interesting in the past when you met a girl who was into the hardcore scene, but I think it’s kinda gross when you meet a girl who is otherwise normal but she’s got a huge-ass tattoo on her biceps.

Posted by mikeguas on 05/31/05 at 04:37 AM from United States

I hate the ones on their backs. When I’m doing a chick, I want to enjoy the girl, and not look down thinking I’m at the fucking Getty.

Posted by Manwhore on 05/31/05 at 04:38 AM from United States

Depends on the types of tatoos and the tastes of the content.

Angelina Joelees are pretty hot.

I usually go by the hot aspect of it. If the woman can carry it well it works. If not, it can be distracting.

some people (like myself) cant really rock a tatoo. There are women like that too.

Posted by Manwhore on 05/31/05 at 04:39 AM from United States

I met a girl once who had a tatoo that was a Jamaican flag on the small of her back. Looking at her whiteness, I asked her why the Jamaican flag?

Her name was Jamaica.

Not attractive.

Posted by mikeguas on 05/31/05 at 04:51 AM from United States

If you ever go out to Ventura CA, every girl has either a dolphin, a smiley face of some sort on their body, or a sun around the belly button. Its ironic the sun tattoos expand with age, similar to what our own sun will do when it ages. Very attractive.

Posted by Loud on 05/31/05 at 06:37 AM from United States

I’m with you 100%.  I’ve always been offput by tattoos, but wasn’t there some news story lately about how tattoos and piercings were signs of tough times in a person’s life?  AKA, baggage?  Of course, thinking about that now, my first two serious girlfriends got tattoos on the small of their backs a couple months after dumping me.  Sweet.  Heh.  (I’ve dated only one other girl since and she’s not the type to get one.)

Posted by Adam Lawson on 05/31/05 at 06:59 AM from United States

Ah, someone else who feels this way.

I am sick to death of seeing a cute girl, then noticing that ridiculous tattoo on the base of her spine. Why the hell do they do that?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 08:11 AM from United States

I agree with you Lee.  It is ALSO another example of people in this country who don’t think ahead, don’t think about their future.  How crappy is that tatoo going to look when they are in their 70s?  Certainly, these aren’t the people wondering about the future at all.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 08:23 AM from United States

Eh it works for some and not for others. It’s not a dealbreaker. I’m pretty ambivalent but I think that lotsa tattoos might be a sign a chick isn’t too happy with what God gave her.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 09:21 AM from United States

Tattoos are trashy.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 09:27 AM from United States

I have always thought tatoos on girls or women were just not attractive.  I’m seeing more and more otherwise very cute girls with these horrible huge tatoos on their backs.  I just don’t think its attractive, but then I’m not a guy.  I did get my navel pierced 5 years ago.  It was a present to my self for losing weight, and I think it’s kind of sexy.  My husband thought I was going thru some kind of crisis.  After I assured him I was not in any kind of crisis it grew on him and now he really loves it.  I have 10 piercings on my left ear, but wear very smalls studs in them, if I wear any at all.  But the lip, eyebrow etc. piercings are not my cup of tea.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 09:39 AM from United States

I think that in general there is no faster way for a pretty girl to ugly herself up than to get a bunch of tattoos.

On the other hand, you can pretty much bet she’s an easy lay from a distance, so it cuts down on searching for poon on Friday night at the bar.

The lower back tattoos serve a duel purpose:

1) it serves as a form of identification if you can’t tell one girl apart from another by the back of her head

2) it lets the world know that she’s the type of girl that needs her very own “slut bar code” so you can distinguish her from all the other easy tramps if you want to ride her again

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 09:48 AM from United States

The hottest tatoo I have ever “come across” was in college.  This chick had a dollar sign tatooed right above her ass, when I asked her what it was for she replied.  That’s the money spot, when you’re getting me from behind pull out and shoot me right there.

Looking back now she a was a total skank, but at that time I was blown away.  So I can handle some tatoos, as long as they can be hidden most of the time.

Posted by w.atkinson on 05/31/05 at 09:50 AM from United States

Tatoos on chicks are like those same who smoke.  There is nothing inherently sexy about a chick with a cig in her hand except fofr the fact that, in some way, it is hot (look at the retro Camel ads featuring the exotic 20’s and 30’s women).  Smoking, and tatoos aren’t sexy themselves, but they say, rather scream, 1) I am not constrained by social convention, and 2) I don’t really respect my body which both equate to the idea that she may give it up easily and quickly).  Obviously some blanket statement about smokers, tatooees and sexual promiscuity but I’ll bet that there is a pretty strong correlation between girls who smike/have tats,and the ease in which some guy can get in her pants. 

So, Lee, tats are sexy, but really only in a way that allows the guys to quickly and easily identify the low hanging fruit at the bar.  If I were looking for a one nighter and have to choose between tat girl and non-tat girl, I know whose drinks I’d be buying. (Alas, those days are long behind: married five years this June).

Also, to those still single, you’ve got it easy.  Trampy chicks didn’t advertise so dramatically back in the “old” days.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 09:53 AM from United States

If I were looking for a one nighter and have to choose between tat girl and non-tat girl, I know whose drinks I’d be buying.

Touche. You’ve got the right idea, but usually tattoo chicks want attention, so you have to give it to them in small bursts mixed in with periods of just ignoring them. It pisses them off but they end up working for your attention. And that’s right where you want them…

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 10:03 AM from United States

This chick had a dollar sign tatooed right above her ass, when I asked her what it was for she replied.  That’s the money spot, when you’re getting me from behind pull out and shoot me right there.

You know ... if she’s getting it so often that she has to illustrate where to shoot, maybe it’s just me cuz I’m a chick, but all I can think about is filthy, diseased whore. Maybe it was different back when you were in college, but goddamn that seems too much like a walking STD billboard to be a turn-on.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 10:03 AM from United States

Funny that you mention this topic Lee. I was just telling my wife yesterday how damned disgusting I think those waist (small of the back) tattoos are. LOL at Seattle Outcast. “Very own slut barcode...” I’m going to use that one.

Posted by w.atkinson on 05/31/05 at 10:06 AM from United States

I AM!!!! a pig for stating this but there is a tried and true method for the first meet closing of the deal.  It plays perfectly into the vast majority of Women’s psyches.  Once you’ve been introduced, you must then, througout the evening, forget their name three (3) times.  This takes discipline as if you have already forgotten it twice, it’s probably looking good anyway.  Nonetheless, YOU MUST fforget the name a third time and say something self-depreciating like “I can;t believe this, but I have forgotten you name AGAIN!?” Even apologize.  This screams loud and clear that you aren’t really interessted in her.  That makes women interested, normally, very interested.

Caveat: you cannot pull this off if you’re hammered as she will assume that you’ve forgotten her name because you are slurring and falling into people.  Twice is insufficient and four times and your just being a dick.  Three times is the charm, the cheap and underhanded, play with bar-girls ego method of one night deal closing.

My first interview for an outside sales job (very tough market) and I had no experience.  My interviewer asked me how many women I had slept with the night I met them.  No shit, this was a Fortune 500 but also 1994.  I didn’t kow if he was some sort of puritan fundamentalist and looking to weed out evil in his slaes force or what, but I replied truthfully (I invented, by accident, the thrice name forgetting method remember). 

I got the job:  He wanted closers.  Sick, I know.  I was twenty one, and that’s my excuse.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 10:20 AM from United States

Three times is the charm, the cheap and underhanded, play with bar-girls ego method of one night deal closing.

If a chick is at a bar and actually talking to guys that walk up to her, my guess is she hasn’t really set the bar very high to begin with.

Seriously, this must be the whole pre-AIDS thing, but all I can think is OMFG what a bunch of diseased hoe-bags.

Posted by Aaron - Free Will on 05/31/05 at 10:26 AM from United States

You know ... if she’s getting it so often that she has to illustrate where to shoot, maybe it’s just me cuz I’m a chick, but all I can think about is filthy, diseased whore. Maybe it was different back when you were in college, but goddamn that seems too much like a walking STD billboard to be a turn-on.

Just imagine being the lucky guy who gets to be her husband. “Wow, honey, I love giving it to you from behind, because everytime I look down, I realize what a disgusting skank I’ve landed.”

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 10:30 AM from United States

LOL Aaron - excellent point.

Posted by Aaron - Free Will on 05/31/05 at 10:42 AM from United States

Well seriously, come on (no pun intended): Wouldn’t it have sort of ruined the impact of the movie “Pretty Woman” if it had been revealead that she had a rate card inked onto her tits?

If you’re going to be an accomplished slut, fine, but don’t leave a paper trail.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 10:54 AM from United States

Just imagine being the lucky guy who gets to be her husband

exactly, that is the entire point.  These girls are getting these tatoos now, and 10 years from now they will undoubtedly regret it.

Posted by Helo on 05/31/05 at 11:04 AM from United States

Am I the only one that doesn’t like tattoos on girls?

No, I’m with you. Those things are nasty.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 11:26 AM from United States

Totally with you, it’s like painting a mustache on the Mona Lisa. If a girl gets a tat of a humming bird on her ass, in 60 years it will look like a flamingo.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 11:29 AM from United States

It doesn’t sound like most of you could handle these types of chicks anyway, so you’re better off sticking to MILFs and mallwalkers.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 11:51 AM from United States

You don’t get it. These women are so unique and so rebellious that they rush out to get the exact same tats as everyone else.  Men are just as big of puppets! (/ sarc)

As for the one with the dollar sign, she might want to install a tissue dipenser...or a drainage ditch. X^P

I heard a comic mention those backend tats too.

“You don’t put a bumper sticker on a Rolls Royce”

That tells ya sumtin, eh?

I’m more attracted to a woman with no tats at all. That’s a girl that doesn’t care about “what’s in” and is her own person. Peaches and Cream...mmm...SEXY!!!

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 11:58 AM from United States

Maybe it was different back when you were in college, but goddamn that seems too much like a walking STD billboard to be a turn-on.

well, she was a red head, so I knew to expect the unexpected.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:00 PM from United States

If a chick is at a bar and actually talking to guys that walk up to her, my guess is she hasn’t really set the bar very high to begin with.

Ha, that’s brilliant :D And yet another justification for my decision not to drink (never have, never will) :P They don’t call booze the “liquid panty remover” for nothing! o_O

As for the whole “hard to get/pretend you’re not interested” thing...it can work for both sexes, but, if you have two playing the same game, my guess is that almost always, the man will blink first (and watkinson, if that ex-boss of yours hasn’t had his ass sued for sexual harassment by now, I’ll be very surprised. Did he ask the same question of female interviewees?? I can see his logic, but what an icky creep *shudders*)

Back on topic: never once considered getting a tattoo - to me, it seems like vandalizing one’s own body.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:02 PM from United States

well, she was a red head, so I knew to expect the unexpected.

I guess itching, burning genitalia could count as “the unexpected”.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:03 PM from United States

If a chick is at a bar and actually talking to guys that walk up to her, my guess is she hasn’t really set the bar very high to begin with.

Damn...I actually met my wife at a bar. Good thing she didn’t follow that philosophy...Then again, she married me, so maybe she really doesn’t set the bar too high.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:07 PM from United States

tats on girls go well with clear pumps and pole swinging.  Especially the barbed wire ones. 

So did the resurgence of hip huggers result from an increase in lower back tattoos or vice-versa?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:08 PM from United States

watkinson-

Taking a page out of my book? I’ve played that card before. It’s not about making a girl like you, it’s about making her want you.  Most of the time that means cutting her off midsentence to say hi to some other chick…

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:10 PM from United States

Taking a page out of my book? I’ve played that card before. It’s not about making a girl like you, it’s about making her want you.  Most of the time that means cutting her off midsentence to say hi to some other chick…

You assholes are just lucky that there will be a never-ending supply of chicks who didn’t get enough attention from daddy.

Posted by Sean Galbraith on 05/31/05 at 12:14 PM from Canada

For me, it is all about moderation. I don’t like a lot of piercings or a lot of tatoos. But tasteful ones, especially ones that have a deep personal meaning, don’t bother me a bit.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:15 PM from United States

So did the resurgence of hip huggers result from an increase in lower back tattoos or vice-versa?

It probably doesn’t matter much when they bend over and the tat is covered by a whale tail (another stupid trend, IMO).

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 12:20 PM from United States

Very unattractive. 

It has been said that ‘the untatooed body is mute.’ But I see it as a person attempting to assert their individuality physically because they are too inarticlate to do so any other way.  That goes for guys, too.  And though a tattoo alone (especially a large one) does not necessarily equal ‘skank’, its a pretty good indication, in my experience.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:21 PM from United States

Just so the men don’t feel left out. Please stop being drunken dopes around women groping/kissing eachother.

First, you’re encouraging women to get with women. They can get all the attention they want from men...without actually including you in the process. That encouragement can also lead to those two hot girls out of the club...again, without you.

Secondly, it’s nasty. I don’t care if it’s Jennifer Anniston and Angelia Jolee having a make-out fight over Brad. It’s as gross as Kutner and Willis doing the same over Demi Moore.

Just wait, guys. You’ll see how the strip-show spending and lesbian-scene gawking puts us right at the bottom of the evolutionary ladder. Time to stop acting like spectators and invoke participation. Sorry for the rant.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:29 PM from United States

What’s in that Pink Floyd song?  “...ooohhh, I need a dirty woman, oooohhh, I need a dirty girl.”

Yeah, that’s me.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:30 PM from United States

You assholes are just lucky that there will be a never-ending supply of chicks who didn’t get enough attention from daddy.

Moxie:

You’re right. They are lucky.

It has been said that ‘the untatooed body is mute.’ But I see it as a person attempting to assert their individuality physically because they are too inarticlate to do so any other way.  That goes for guys, too.  And though a tattoo alone (especially a large one) does not necessarily equal ‘skank’, its a pretty good indication, in my experience.

Men can be herded easier than cattle. It’s a joke. If these women are skanks, then men are the moronic buffoons that support & encourage their behavior.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 12:31 PM from United States

Just so the men don’t feel left out. Please stop being drunken dopes around women groping/kissing eachother.

Well, its kind of like what w.atkinson said:  as tats identify the low - hanging fruit at the bar for a pickup, so too does girlie bisexuality identify the low - hanging fruit for a threesome.  Not that you would respect, or want to talk to any of the above in the morning.  But then, that’s the downside of male and female sexuality for you : at their worst the one will do anything for attention, the other will simply do anything.

Posted by techunter on 05/31/05 at 12:32 PM from United States

Quick story on tatted chicks. My ex-girlfriend was virtual tattoo artist’s canvas. We dated for a number of months before her brother confided in me that the guy who did all her tats is an ex-boyfriend and that when she is not in a relationship or when the relationship is (in her mind) ending, she has sex with said ex-boyfriend for which she gets a new tattoo in return.

Well several more months go by and our relationship turns rocky. Almost like clock-work, after not getting a new tattoo the entire time we were dating, the new tattoos began appearing. I waited awhile before confronting her on how she paid for the tattoos as I regularly gave her money (I am a successful Real-estate agent) to pay rent and keep the lights on at her crappy studio apartment. Initially she claimed she got them in return for some sewing (how she made her meager living) she promised to do for her tattoo artist friend. A few days later in a drunken bout of conscience she admitted she was back to screwing for ink. Needless to say after I got done laughing, crying and scheduling my STD testing, I broke up with her.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 12:32 PM from United States

Men can be herded easier than cattle. It’s a joke. If these women are skanks, then men are the moronic buffoons that support & encourage their behavior.

Yup.  for every skank, there are 2 indiscriminate men, at least.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:39 PM from United States

Also, am I the only one who finds drewdognj’s tale of woe ever more unbelievable? Innocent little boy, he is not.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:40 PM from United States

for every skank, there are 2 indiscriminate men, at least.

Try 10-15 :)

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:42 PM from United States

You assholes are just lucky that there will be a never-ending supply of chicks who didn’t get enough attention from daddy

My Ecuadorian friend always says that American father give too much of their money and not enough of their time. The result is that girls develop very unhealthy ideas about what a relationship with a man ought to be. Many seek shallow relationships in which the guy buys them stuff. I don’t think he’s right about 100% of American girls, but he might be onto something in wealthy North Jersey.

And Moxie, we’re not lucky. We just tailor our game plan to what’s out there.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:43 PM from United States

Innocent little boy, he is not.

I am 100% innocent of what I was accused of. That doesn’t make me a saint.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:44 PM from United States

The result is that girls develop very unhealthy ideas about what a relationship with a man ought to be. Many seek shallow relationships in which the guy buys them stuff.

Baby, they’re just tailoring their game plan to the suckers out there.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:45 PM from United States

Baby, they’re just tailoring their game plan to the suckers out there.

Touche

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:45 PM from United States

I am 100% innocent of what I was accused of. That doesn’t make me a saint.

I think if you were 100% innocent, you’d be pissed off at the chick who made the false accusation in the first place, rather than just giving her a pass and saying she’s a little mixed-up.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:48 PM from United States

I am pissed off. I didn’t go into much detail about my anger with her because I was specifically speaking about police misconduct. I’m going to press charges against her. I’m going to sue her. I know I mentioned that at some point on the other thread. If not, then probably on the thread before it.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 12:48 PM from United States

So is this tale of woe of DrewdogNJ’s on another thread?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:49 PM from United States

Yeah I keep getting drawn out into having to defend myself…

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:50 PM from United States

I know I mentioned that at some point on the other thread. If not, then probably on the thread before it.

Yeah, I got bored and stopped reading. There’s only so much “cops are eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil” repeated over and over and over that a girl can take.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:50 PM from United States

Interesting story techunter.

I’m sorry you endured that experience. Just another example of women using sex to get free stuff and men using the wrong head.

A fool and his money are soon parted...

Thankfully you got out of there, and hope the tests came back negative.

David W:

I might be off-ended, but at least I’m not the only one that recognizes the side-effects of this stuff. I’m one that’s impressed with a woman’s individuality, prowess, and natural beauty...unfortunately, I’m destined to die alone in today’s batchelor scene.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:51 PM from United States

For the most part, tats aren’t that great looking, even when they tats themselves are great.  The only time I’ve seen a girl that a tat looked good on was this girl who had two sleek wings on her back.  I’ve got a pic somewhere or other, but can’t find it.

Other than that, not really.  I keep thinking about that Robin Williams skit.  Something about, you get a tatoo of barb wire and 20 years later its a picket fence.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:54 PM from United States

I keep thinking about that Robin Williams skit.  Something about, you get a tatoo of barb wire and 20 years later its a picket fence.

Personally, I think it’s funny that there’s going to be a rash of middle-aged women with the slut sign (butterfly on lower-back) before too long. And all us unhip doofuses without tats will be soooooooooo thankful we didn’t go along with everyone else at college.

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 12:54 PM from United States

Posted by drewdognj on 05/31 at 10:49 AM

Yeah I keep getting drawn out into having to defend myself…

If you would quit making universal generalizations based on one bad incident, you wouldn’t have to keep defending yourself.

You had one bad deal from the cops in one county of one State, and suddenly it’s “ALL COPS ALL EVIL ALL THE TIME”. You don’t see the problem, and that is why people are calling you on the bullshit.

Simple enough.

Hi, Moxie! How was your weekend?

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 12:57 PM from United States

Yeah, I saw some kid in San Francisco (many years ago) who had this huge web design tattoo on his face. He was in his late teens/early 20’s, and had “rebel loner” written all over him.

I wonder which prison he’s in now.

(I cannot imagine that he would have ever become a semi-productive member of society, because who would ever hire a guy with a spiderweb tat on his face?)

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 12:58 PM from United States

Drum: It was for suck - been home sick all freaking weekend. Thanks for asking though :)

And yeah, trying to talk sense into drewdognj is like trying to convince a belligerent racist that not all blacks are evil just cuz he had a single bad experience.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 12:59 PM from United States

I might be off-ended, but at least I’m not the only one that recognizes the side-effects of this stuff. I’m one that’s impressed with a woman’s individuality, prowess, and natural beauty...unfortunately, I’m destined to die alone in today’s batchelor scene.

Point taken and I sympathize.. I’ve never been very cynical in my dealings with women, and it is precisely because I value them that I am so off-put by some of this stuff (tattoos, borderline behavior, etc).  And sure, you may be in trouble in the bar scene.  But its for the best, as it is infinately easier to have a healthy relationship with someone who is already healthy and well adjusted than someone who is screwed up.  And promiscuity, tattoos, etc probably equaly screwed up.  But easily screwable.  And there is not much overlap, IMO.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:00 PM from United States

Try 10-15 :)

Yep. That’s the problem.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:02 PM from United States

It’s funny to see the guys exchanging tips on bagging the easiest chicks and then seeing how many guys are shocked *shocked* that women would take advantage of men financially. They’re both using the other, they just have different goals in mind.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 01:05 PM from United States

Don’t know the specifics of drewdognj ‘s bad experience with the police, but you know what they say:

“a neocon is a liberal who has been mugged.  A Liberal is a conservative who has been arrested”.

Not that I have anything particularly against law enforcement in general.  But there are plenty of idiot cops out there.  And plenty of ‘guilty until proven innocent’ attitudes, depending on the allegation.  And I don’t agree with the hardcore ‘law and order’ branch of comservatism out there.  But I certainly would not contend that to be a cop is to be fundamentally corrupt, etc.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:10 PM from United States

Thanks, David W.

I have my fun. That being said, you’re right. I too can be cynical, but no matter how many times I get angered at a woman whipping up tears to get out of a ticket, Low-cut blouses at interviews, the 2 women dancing on a box with all eyes on them, or the superficial “I don’t date anyone without a BMW” bling-bling BS. It all comes back to men. We’re the culprits. I can’t blame women for playing us like the brainless twits we are.

If we cut out the drooling monkey routine...they would find other, more intelligent ways to arouse our curiousity.

Posted by Pat Meebles on 05/31/05 at 01:12 PM from United States

Well, there’s always been a hardcore subculture, even back in the 80s.  Girls who were really into ink as a form of body art, that sort of thing.

Well, I knew that. It’s still around. But I never knew that it was mainstream fashionable to have a giant sleeve or tattoo on a calf. I thought the only fashionable one was the “cute” tattoo right above the ass.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 01:13 PM from United States

Moxie, one could argue that both types of behavior (picking up easy women / gold-digging off of suckers) are just debased versons of the biological imperative of each sex.  Too often the apology for male promiscuity is biologically oriented, but not seen for the antisocial act it really is - though gold-digging is widely recognized as a simplified , debased version of the female nesting / nurturing imperative.  The truth is that both are undesirable, and those who serially practice both probably deserve each other.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:17 PM from United States

There’s NOTHING shocking about a woman taking advantage of a man financially.

Nothing worth discussing on how to lay an easy chick either...that’s about as useful as discussing “the art of breathing”.

Techniques? How hard is it to say, “Nice shoes, wanna f@*#?”

Men are attracted to curves and skin. Women are attracted to bank-rolls and wealth. Only fair. Women spend a lot on beauty. Men spend a lot on beauty. All relative.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:22 PM from United States

This is why I support legalized prostitution. Half of dating is that anyway—“If I take her to a nice dinner, but some expensive gifts, etc. etc. maybe she’ll put out.” Why not just give her the money directly and save everyone a lot of time? :-)

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:27 PM from United States

ALL COPS ALL EVIL ALL THE TIME

I never said that…

And yeah, trying to talk sense into drewdognj is like trying to convince a belligerent racist that not all blacks are evil just cuz he had a single bad experience

Blacks have only one thing in common: skin color. Cops chose a path to go down in life that carries them through a broken system that encourages, passively and actively, corruption of the worst kinds. The key is in the system. I’ve been talking about the need for systemic change. The system corrupts the cops.

I’m not saying there aren’t any good ones out there. I respect urban cops who have to work for a living. I don’t respect the suburban do-nothings.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:28 PM from United States

Yeah...after the roses, dinner, and movie...if she doesn’t put out, I can have her arrested for stealing? Fraud, maybe?

Besides, find one at a bar, everyone else paid for her drinks, and she’s drunk enough to go home with you free-of-charge. How’s that for a ploy?

Just a joke...Only teasing.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:28 PM from United States

I think the difference between biological imperative and gold-digging is that the biological necessity involves propagating the species - but I don’t see a whole lot of gold-diggers popping out babies. It’s a twisted version of the biological desire for a provider - it’s an expectation of financial security in exchange for ... well, for what? The idea behind gold-digging is that a woman is so wonderful and special and fabulous that she should be supported in exchange for doing nothing. She’s a special snowflake and should be cared for accordingly.

Just weird.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:32 PM from United States

Blacks have only one thing in common: skin color. Cops chose a path to go down in life that carries them through a broken system that encourages, passively and actively, corruption of the worst kinds. The key is in the system. I’ve been talking about the need for systemic change. The system corrupts the cops.

Actually, according to the liberal view of the world (and hence the reasoning behind affirmative action, etc.) is that skin color involves a common uniting culture and oppression and blah dee blah. “Systemic racism,” you see.

How about hatred of anyone belonging to a certain religion? After all, that’s definitely a chosen path.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:33 PM from United States

Yeah...after the roses, dinner, and movie...if she doesn’t put out, I can have her arrested for stealing? Fraud, maybe?

I know the analogy isn’t perfect. I just wanted to work in a “I think prostitution should be legal.” comment in here somewhere. :-)

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:35 PM from United States

Moxie:

Well, kids cut into the “petty cash”, for one. You can’t be spoiled rotten when the kids are getting half the assets and attention. Also, a child can ruin mommy’s chances of scoring Donald Trump. Luckily, gold-diggers are the only ones so shallow and they are easily spotted.

Posted by Kilroy on 05/31/05 at 01:35 PM from United States

Know that I think about it.  I got fucked over by a fake blond with fake boobs.  I just don’t know what to hate more, fake blonds, fake boobs, or fake people. 

Hell I’ll just them all.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:36 PM from United States

It’s not the same unless the religion is one that actively attempts to usurp my liberty. You certainly can make assumptions about people based on their religion, provided they actually adhere to it. If the believe spent as much time in church/temple/mosque as a cop did on the job, then we could assume they’re pretty devout.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:36 PM from United States

I got fucked over by a fake blond with fake boobs.  I just don’t know what to hate more, fake blonds, fake boobs, or fake people. 

Oh boo hoo :)

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:37 PM from United States

Damn you Mark_M and your hidden agenda!!!!!

YEAAAARRRGGG!

LMAO!

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:37 PM from United States

Know that I think about it.  I got fucked over by a fake blond with fake boobs.  I just don’t know what to hate more, fake blonds, fake boobs, or fake people.

Hell I’ll just them all.

Blondes aren’t organized and unionized. Blondes aren’t part of a system that encourages corruption.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:38 PM from United States

drew: OMFG come off it already!

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 01:42 PM from United States

Drew: so I take it you are not a “the Shield” fan?  :)

Posted by Kilroy on 05/31/05 at 01:42 PM from United States

Wow, it was a joke, Drewdognj. a joke.  Do you remember those things; and she didn’t fuck me over she fucked me good. 

Damn you mom.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:42 PM from United States

This thread was very educational.

Now when all of you keep talking about wanting to “hit it” every time you see my picture, I’ll be able to supress the urge to vomit because I know all I’ll have to do is show you my tattoos and you’ll run off in the other direction.

More effective than pepper spray.

Posted by sneaky_pete on 05/31/05 at 01:43 PM from United States

amen!

I like brunettes with real boobs.

How that comment adds quality to the life of anyone, I do not know.  It probably doesn’t.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:44 PM from United States

Wanted to know how many you nailed on the first night?  Who can keep track?

I would have had to ballpark it and tell him I lost count.

Posted by sneaky_pete on 05/31/05 at 01:44 PM from United States

Kilroy said:

Hell I’ll just them all.

Huh?

Posted by Kilroy on 05/31/05 at 01:45 PM from United States

Manda,

Last time I saw you naked you didn’t have a tattoo.  Did you place my name somewhere?????????????

Posted by Kilroy on 05/31/05 at 01:47 PM from United States

Sneaky_Pete

I don’t even know what I am talking about.  Midnight shift sucks.  Off to bed.................

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:48 PM from United States

drew: OMFG come off it already!

Never!

Posted by sneaky_pete on 05/31/05 at 01:49 PM from United States

Blondes aren’t part of a system that encourages corruption.

Uh, hello!  Porn industry?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:50 PM from United States

haha!

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:52 PM from United States

Never!

You can stop, really. I think everyone’s pretty much concluded already that you’re a twat. You’re just beating a dead horse, really.

Posted by sneaky_pete on 05/31/05 at 01:53 PM from United States

Moxie, is Drew referring to cops?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:55 PM from United States

Pete: When is he *not* talking about cops??

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 01:59 PM from United States

I wasn’t talking about cops unil someone else (I wonder who) got me started.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:01 PM from United States

drew: I was just making a simple comment that wasn’t actually directed to you. So nyah :P

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:04 PM from United States

Also, am I the only one who finds drewdognj’s tale of woe ever more unbelievable? Innocent little boy, he is not.

Ummm right…

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:06 PM from United States

drew: Did I say “DREW: I find your tale unbelievable - you are not innocent”? Nope.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:10 PM from United States

Glad to give you some insight, Manda.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:11 PM from United States

Of course you didn’t you’re comment wasn’t the least bit insulting to me. Moxie, you’re playing games. You started it and you know it. Don’t pin it on me when I defend myself after a remark like that.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:29 PM from United States

Manda, I think you’d need some seriously freaky sleeves and the like for guys to turn away.  ^,~

This reminds me, I did see somewhere, maybe Stile, that had a girl w/ a butterfly tatoo’d on her crotch.  Not above, not next to, but right on.  Then she also had a couple lines that went from the butterfly to over her hips and to the back.  Gonna have to find that picture after work.  ^,^`

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:31 PM from United States

Oh, I think tats work better for petite gals.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:35 PM from United States

Manda, I think you’d need some seriously freaky sleeves and the like for guys to turn away.  ^,~

But no! All girls with even a square inch of ink are complete skankola, disease-ridden ho-bags!

I’m gonna go pierce my clit and hump the Dallas Cowboys.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:38 PM from United States

And, with that, I’m out!

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:49 PM from United States

Well it’s good to have goals Manda! Kudos and tell Julius Jones I said get well soon! Maybe you could “take care of him first”...might help the healing.

I think most of us agreed that some tasteful ink with some meaning in a discreet location is fine...not that it’s our business, not our bodies. But just as it’s your right to wear company logos across your ass and big dollar signs on your tailbone. It is our right to believe it cheapens you.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:50 PM from United States

Don’t get all deep meaning on use, dime.  Ruins the fun.  ^.^

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 02:57 PM from United States

OH...fine. Have your fun…

Besides, she left before I posted anyways.

Posted by Matt from Vegas on 05/31/05 at 03:37 PM from United States

Tattoos are for primative cultures.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:00 PM from United States

My dad has a tattoo (was a sailor - got drunk in Japan one night and woke up with a tat) with his name on it. I have to say, if I ever got a tattoo, it’d be that. Kind of a tribute to my daddy and all. But that’s it.

Posted by JimK on 05/31/05 at 04:01 PM from United States

Wow.  So broad-minded we are.  Such a big tent we have here.

Tattoos should be personal things.  If a chick has wall art (flash) then she’s clearly not considerate of her image (we’re not talking appearance in the beauty sense, but rather the self-image sense), and that speaks to character.

If a person chooses to decorate themselves with carefully chosen original works with meaning...well, they would have to be pretty shitty looking for me to consider alienating them as a human being based on some ink.

I see that many of you would rather judge first and ask questions later.  Maybe you ought to think about why that is instead of worrying about someone else’s ink.  How’s yoru house?  Perfectly clean in the character department?

Judge not lest ye...Doesn’t it go something like that?  I forget.  Glass houses, maybe.  These sayings, I get ‘em mixed up.

Posted by Miguelito on 05/31/05 at 04:10 PM from United States

Tatoos on chicks are like those same who smoke.  There is nothing inherently sexy about a chick with a cig in her hand except fofr the fact that, in some way, it is hot (look at the retro Camel ads featuring the exotic 20’s and 30’s women). 

Ugh.. speak for yourself.  I find smoking disgusting.. massive turnoff when I see even the sexiest looking woman smoking.

Smoking, and tatoos aren’t sexy themselves, but they say, rather scream, 1) I am not constrained by social convention,

Oh please… smoking is practically required in so many social circles, and only a few decades ago was more normal then not smoking was.  Commericals on TV even had doctors promoting smoking.

Smoking is about as “not constrained by social convention” as the goth kids on South Park are not conforming.. by conforming with each other.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:10 PM from United States

How’s yoru house?  Perfectly clean in the character department?

Absolutely. I’m perfect, haven’t you heard??

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 04:13 PM from United States

JimK, don’t read too much into what I’ve been saying.  Who is denying anyone’s humanity?  I’m only saying that tattoos on women tend to be indicative of personal issues, and that in addition to this observation have opined that I find them unattractive.  And if you want to say that there is no link between female tattoos and sluttiness, however indirect, then you are entitled to both your opinion and your politically correct, non-judgemental rose colored glasses.  Not saying that there aren’t exceptions, either, but as I said its a pretty good indication: one factor among many. 

and ‘carefully chosen works with meaning’ .. please.  Tattoos are pop art, in the sense that they are even art at all. I’m not going to deny anyone their humanity based on bad aesthetics, certainly.  But I’m not going to shut down my critical faculties or observation of the world around me because I’m afraid of offending someone.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:14 PM from United States

Ugh.. speak for yourself.  I find smoking disgusting.. massive turnoff when I see even the sexiest looking woman smoking.

I’m allergic to smoke and still think smoking looks hot. The brainwashing has worked!

Posted by JimK on 05/31/05 at 04:20 PM from United States

and ‘carefully chosen works with meaning’ .. please.  Tattoos are pop art, in the sense that they are even art at all.

Glad you speak for the whole world there Mr. Art Critic.

As for your anthropological study linking tattoos to “sluttiness,” can I see your raw data please?  Some evidence besides anecdotes about whatever hot chicks with ink that turned you down and made you bitter would be nice.

Posted by JimK on 05/31/05 at 04:21 PM from United States

I’m perfect, haven’t you heard??

I have a copy of the memo...no...yes, I have...I have the memo right here…

;)

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 04:22 PM from United States

How’s this for a chart:

You are a guy.  The girl you want to pick up in a bar has all of the following traits and habits:

alcohol/drug abuse
liberal politics, or apoltical
tattoos
provocative / tight clothes
smokes like a chimney

vs.

little alcohol use
politically moderate or conservative
no ink
dresses tastefully
does not smoke

which one are you buying drinks?

Sure, the 2nd example could very possible hump like Messalina with multiple parners a night.  But realistically, which is more likely? 

We can quibble about the details, but I contend that tattoos belongs on the top list.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:25 PM from United States

Sure, the 2nd example could very possible hump like Messalina with multiple parners a night.

That’s *totally* me. Except I drink like a fish.

Maybe it’s the booze factor? And WTF is a chick who only drinks a little doing at a bar scoping for sausage?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:25 PM from United States

So what it really comes down to, is not that the tattoo is there, but the reasons behind the tattoo and the location?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:25 PM from United States

Actually, I need to switch my answer. I can’t do multiple partners cuz after one I’m like “okay, you can go away now - I need to sleep.”

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 04:29 PM from United States

Glad you speak for the whole world there Mr. Art Critic.

The “whole world” does not determine what good art is.  Art itself is inherently elitist: it is educated opinion, both past and present, that defines art (and it is emblematic of the sorry state of the Humanities today some of what passes for educated opinion today).  Tattoos belong in a catagory somewhere in the Folk Art range.  Or would you contend that Botticelli would have been a tattoo artist today?  Come on.  Next you’ll be telling us that fuzzy neon Elvis posters are high art.

By all means admire all of the ‘original’ ink you want.  But don’t claim its artistic, any more than other popular mediums.

Posted by JimK on 05/31/05 at 04:30 PM from United States

I get it.  Hot chicks with ink shit on you in abar, so all girls with ink are trash.

Nice coping mechanism David.  Shall we examine your life in detail and find something with which to dismiss you as a decent person?

Fifty bucks says you give me open access to your life and it’ll take me ten minutes to find a viable reason to shit all over you as a person.

Glass.  Houses.  It’s one thing to state a personal preference with regards to appearance.  For example, I’m not too keen on blondes...although there are many beautiful blonde women in the world, I will almost always favor the dark or red hair.  It doesn’t make all blondes ugly bitches unworthy of my time, however.

It’s quite something to extract the bizarre conclusions you have reached and start calling people sluts based on the color *on* their skin.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:31 PM from United States

By all means admire all of the ‘original’ ink you want.  But don’t claim its artistic, any more than other popular mediums.

It definitely counts as art. Art isn’t elitist, art is a unique creation. (And yes, folk art is still art.)

Other popular mediums include music ... definitely not elitist, but definitely an art form.

Sheesh.

Posted by JimK on 05/31/05 at 04:32 PM from United States

But don’t claim its artistic, any more than other popular mediums.

Oh, so art has to be 400 years old to be art?

That stick up your ass comfortable or what?

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 04:32 PM from United States

Maybe it’s the booze factor? And WTF is a chick who only drinks a little doing at a bar scoping for sausage?

well the ‘scoping for sausage’ tends to prejudice the sampling a bit :) Yeah, the weakness of the analogy is the bar setting in the first place: maybe ‘a bar regular’ vs ‘seldom visitor’ could be added to the scenario.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:36 PM from United States

JimK:
Tattoos are also a trendy thing. Just a commercialize decoration inked over and over again in the same spot on different people. True, some are very spiritual, but most are not. Note the term, Very own slut barcode, harsh and crude...but in the major populace...those proportions are correct. Even if you don’t agree with it.

All I see here, with some exceptions, are people voicing their opinions about what they find attractive and what they find “skanky”. Human beings are very judgmental creatures. Would you consider yourself so righteous as to not judge? Are you not judging us all on mere text containing no candor? No offense...some may have gone off track, or even blinded by emotion, but “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”

And, “if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck”...or something like that…

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:37 PM from United States

maybe ‘a bar regular’ vs ‘seldom visitor’ could be added to the scenario.

I’m a bar regular. But it’s a classy bar and I’m not on the prowl for sausage :)

Posted by w.atkinson on 05/31/05 at 04:37 PM from United States

Smoking is about as “not constrained by social convention” as the goth kids on South Park are not conforming.. by conforming with each other.

You are right about smoking being clichéd but I still contend that a girl who smokes looks easier than one who doesn’t.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 04:38 PM from United States

I can only conclude that I’ve hit a sore spot with JimK here.  Now, who is making this personal again?  no, a woman is not automatically a slut because she sports ink.  She is a slut because of sexual habits.  But I, along with a few others here, contend that there is significant overlap between the two.  As I explicitly said, it is one factor of several.  But you seem so brainwashed into this politically correct, never-judge mentality so prevalent today that you not only see no conenction, you resufe to believe that there could be one.  Fine.  You have plenty of company.

Posted by Matt from Vegas on 05/31/05 at 04:38 PM from United States

I drink as often as I breathe and tattoos never sounded like a good idea to me.  Maybe everyone else has a defective gene.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 04:41 PM from United States

Oh, so art has to be 400 years old to be art?

That stick up your ass comfortable or what?

The present can only tentatively identify what is art.  It can only be fully defined when its relevance and immediacy transcend generations and ages.  As for your second sentence above, I can only conclude that your aesthetics are matched by your grammar.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:46 PM from United States

The present can only tentatively identify what is art.  It can only be fully defined when its relevance and immediacy transcend generations and ages.

You did *not* just say that. Man, you are a tard.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 04:51 PM from United States

I’m talking about high art.  Anyway, its the only way: what are the alternatives?  Either you become totally dependent on modern critics and the ‘educated public’ for standards, or you scrap the idea of any idea of juxtoposing good art with bad art: and call into question the idea of art in any form (since you are doing away with standards).  But this is getting a bit off topic, I think,

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:53 PM from United States

HA.....man that was freakin hilarious..."tard"..
that was awesome.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:56 PM from United States

We are not talking about a Special Forces tattoo that binds a band of brothers with mutual blood and suffering or a tribal icon of adulthood or gesture of unconditional love. We are talking about getting ink done, so she will look sexy in a mid-drift and low-cut pants.(or he will in a wife-beater)

What so individual about, “Sally got one, so now I want one!”?

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 04:58 PM from United States

I’m talking about high art.  Anyway, its the only way: what are the alternatives?  Either you become totally dependent on modern critics and the ‘educated public’ for standards, or you scrap the idea of any idea of juxtoposing good art with bad art: and call into question the idea of art in any form (since you are doing away with standards).

Or - get this - you make up your own goddamn mind. You don’t have the idea of “art” forcefed to you because it’s broad enough to appeal to people over a specific span of time, don’t listen to what critics tell you is good or bad, and you know, show some sort of thought process all by your widdle iddy biddy self.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:04 PM from United States

She didn’t look like she was into the hardcore tattoo scene, she looked like a gal who made a really bad decision.  And I was just curious if there was anyone out here who liked this sort of thing, and if so, could you explain the appeal.

It’s pretty much impossible *not* to know people in the tattoo scene in AZ (Steve Haworth, Church of Bod Mod, and all that). Knew a guy, formerly a really good friend, who was into lobe stretching and suspension and tats and all that - had a full-sleeve done. His explanation was that it was something he felt he had to do to assert his individuality (it was koi - *very* original and unique - heh). Truth was, he was incredibly pathetic and felt the need to stand out (but got pissed off if anyone ever dared to stare at him like the freak he was - lovely how they don’t really think those things through). He was a loser pothead who wanted to belong to a special scene, and that’s pretty much it.

That’s not going to be the story for everyone, of course, but that was it for him.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 05:10 PM from United States

Or - get this - you make up your own goddamn mind.

Then the idea of art is entirely meaningless and it should not be a word or concept.  Indeed, if anything commercial success becomes the best standard to judge a work’s merit.  So the Spice Girls, and reality TV, ultimately become the best a culture has to offer.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:15 PM from United States

Then the idea of art is entirely meaningless and it should not be a word or concept. 

Actually, I think the whole point of art is that it means something to you personally. (Or you think it’s pretty - either is good.) If you can’t make a decision on your own regarding whether something is art or not, or beautiful or not, or if it means something to you, without having some old guy with a beard and pipe tell you that, yes, it is in fact art, then you don’t really deserve to experience it. You’re too afraid of being “wrong” to appreciate it at all. That just seems ... well, sad.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:16 PM from United States

personally, I consider reality Tv on the same level as lets say Jackson Pollacks “art” Who decided that his painting were high art?  He drizzled paint onto a canvas, they’ve proven that most can’t tell his works from an elephants.  You have to just decide for yourself what you like.  Me, I like reality TV

Posted by Miguelito on 05/31/05 at 05:19 PM from United States

I’m allergic to smoke and still think smoking looks hot. The brainwashing has worked!

Growing up with both parents smoking so much that my sister and I could see the bottom of the cloud in the house (I kid you not)… probably had a big hand in making it reprehensible to me. :)

Now, my father doesn’t smoke anymore (went on and off several times) and my mom’s been trying to quit again.. but for at least a decade now they’ve always smoked outside when they did.. even they realised how nasty it was, getting into the drapes, furniture, etc.

I’ve never wanted to even try a cigarette.  My sister said she did once, in High School.. said it damn near made her puke and she never tried another one.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:19 PM from United States

Indeed, if anything commercial success becomes the best standard to judge a work’s merit.  So the Spice Girls, and reality TV, ultimately become the best a culture has to offer.

But by your definition, art has to be popular - otherwise, it wouldn’t “transcend generations and ages.” In order to survive that test of time, it *has* to be popular. So you’re the type of dumbass responsible for people thinking the Mona Lisa is the best painting of all time, when it’s really blah at best. But it’s generic enough to appeal to the masses, and is, by your narrow definition, “high art.” Whereas something contemporary and relevant and controversial isn’t.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:25 PM from United States

i know this already got the shit posted out of it. i had to work til 5. if i see a tasty girl with a tatoo, i automatically discount her from being a possible hook up or whatever. total turn off. you know shes a slam pig if shes got one. i call those lower back tatoos “TRAMP STAMPS” because thats exactly what it is.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 05:36 PM from United States

The personal is the arbitrary.  Any idiot can have something ‘mean something’ to him.  Thus, your definition of art is fundamentally democratic and solipsistic.  You thus would seem to have some common groun with Derrida and his disciples tho believe that all human existence is fundamentally arbitrary, and that interpreting art one can thus twist it to serve the highest purpose:  bringing about social change that subverts bourgeoise society. While you may not agree with the end, seemingly you agree with the means. 

By definition, art has to be known, otherwise it cannot speak.  Educated opinion then debates within itself and without reference to the popular taste of the moment a work’s internal clarity and, in the end, merit.  This process never ends, really.  In its elitism, this process rubs many people, especially Americans, the wrong way.  And the academy has had its own problems for the past 40 or so years.  But in the end much of what our age produces creatively—from bad local bands’ music to the last dying fractured bits of poetry—will be forgotten, and deservedly so.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 05:43 PM from United Kingdom

Most tattoos are not art. They’re shit. Pure and simple.

But some tattoos are works of art.

Most people with tattoos I believe never claim they have art on them.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:44 PM from United States

You thus would seem to have some common groun with Derrida and his disciples tho believe that all human existence is fundamentally arbitrary, and that interpreting art one can thus twist it to serve the highest purpose:  bringing about social change that subverts bourgeoise society.

Dude, are you high?
Seriously.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:45 PM from United States

this definition constricts the artist too much.  your view of art is too structured, and therefore doesn’t allow for freedom, and free thinking which is what art is supposed to inspire. Therefore, your opinion of art is too critical.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:47 PM from United States

this definition constricts the artist too much.  your view of art is too structured, and therefore doesn’t allow for freedom, and free thinking which is what art is supposed to inspire. Therefore, your opinion of art is too critical.

Agreed - except his opinion of art isn’t too critical, it’s that he most likely has his head up his ass. In which case, yeah, it’s probably for the best that he thinks he needs to have someone else tell him what art is, and make up his mind for him on what’s good and bad.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:49 PM from United States

also, i bet jimk is all pissy about the whole tatoo= slut thing cuz his wife has one.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:50 PM from United States

and david w, if i wanted to take another faggity ass boring philosucky class, i would have :P

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 05:50 PM from United States

Not at all.  I’m just saying that the jury is ultimately still out on an artist at least during most of that artist’s life, whatever the initial critical reception.  thus, in the now-dead art form of poetry, we have people like Keats and Hopkins, who had very little critical reception during their lifetimes but who have stood the test of time, as well as like Kipling - thoroughly admired during his lifetime but whose rep has declined (admittedly for the wrong reasons).

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 05:53 PM from United States

David: My point is that according to your view of art, it has to be bland enough to appeal to the masses. And it has to be especially bland if it’s to appeal to multiple generations of masses.

Your view that popularity = art is supremely fucked up.

Posted by Miguelito on 05/31/05 at 05:58 PM from United States

Actually, I think the whole point of art is that it means something to you personally. (Or you think it’s pretty - either is good.)

I can kinda see David W’s point.. there are people that feel that graffiti is art.  While some of it does take some serious talent, we’re talking all of it.  I’ve been in arguments with people that feel “grafitti artists” should be able to grafitti all they want, and that it’s perfectly ok for someone to tag up your house/wall/fence etc.. and that you shouldn’t consider it vandalism.

Fuck that.. I’ve had my house (well, my parents house, when I was younger) regularly tagged for several weeks.  It was ugly as hell, and a huge pain.. we had to immediately paint over it every time (which was almost daily) and the little bastard finally got the message.

There are times when public painting really is art.. like a mural.  But most of that stuff is just crap from uneducated morons.  And considering it all art on the level of great paintings, is just stupid IMNSHO.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 06:02 PM from United States

Miguelito: I understand your point - I still think David W’s a tard though :)

Something that’s artistic doesn’t have to necessarily be great art - just art. Art can suck too. But saying that something is art *only* if it’s popular for a certain period of time is just narrow-minded. It’s like saying you don’t want to bother thinking for yourself or making up your own mind, and will just accept whatever bland pablum lasts a couple of generations as “high art.” It’s just intellectual laziness.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 06:34 PM from United States

I guess I opened up a can of worms with that ‘tattoos = pop art at best’ comment.  But it seems more like intellectual laziness to just label as art that which is personally meaningful.  And I can go against the verdict of generations of critics if I like.  But that will do nothing to alter the perception of a piece unless I become a critic myself. 

Anyway, public popularity is entirely irrelevant.  Art is fundamentally elitist.  That is where I suspect most of you problem with my view is.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 06:34 PM from United Kingdom

HERE

now everyone agree with be that it’s sexy.

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 06:50 PM from United States

Thus, your definition of art is fundamentally democratic and solipsistic.

Hey, Tard… Just so you know, ALL art is subjective (not “solipsistic”, whatever the hell you mean by THAT - and, yes, I know what ‘solpisism’ is, so don’t even start).

Art is an artist using his specific medium - music, paint & canvas, film, clay, sculpture, whatever - to convey a meaning to the public. Everybody will perceive the art differently, whether they want to do so, or not. For example, the picture of ‘The Last Supper’ would probably mean something wildly different to a Catholic than it would to someone in the Priory of Scion. But the picture doesn’t change, just the meaning of that picture to the individual, based on their training and lifetime’s worth of experiences.

Tattoos are similar. While most trashy women I have known in my life have had tattoos, that does not mean by ANY stretch that all tattooed women are trashy sluts.

I suggest you dig out your old math textbooks and look up Venn Diagrams and Boolean logic.

Happy to help.

Posted by Kilroy on 05/31/05 at 06:59 PM from United States

Poosh,

One of those pictures is from your old site.  I always thought it was you.  I guess not.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 07:03 PM from United Kingdom

eh.

Last time I checked I wasn’t:

A) A White
B) A Woman

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 07:14 PM from United States

I never said that all tattooed women were trashy sluts, but that tattoos are one indication of trashy sluttiness.  Its not 100%, certainly.  And as for audience / spectator interpretations: sure, they will vary according to individual tastes, expereinces, and education.  But ultimately most such interpretations do not matter when it comes to forming the canon of an age.  The process of forming a canon can have its arbitrary elements, to be sure.  But as Burke said, we are dwarves sitting on the shoulders of giants, and our contribution to critiquing the icons of past ages is not insignificant, but is not so great as we think.

this is a problem with moderns: we think, deep down, that we are Gods, and each of our judgements is absolute.  This is especially a problem with Americans, and it is ultimately antiintellectual.  Opinionation and personal evaluation is the easiest thing to do when critiquing a work of art and is very democratic—any idiot can do it.  It is understanding that work’s internal structure and context that is challenging.

Posted by JimK on 05/31/05 at 07:15 PM from United States

But you seem so brainwashed into this politically correct, never-judge mentality so prevalent today that you not only see no conenction, you resufe to believe that there could be one.

Dude, you have no idea how fucking stupid it is to try to put me in that little box you’ve built for me.  Ask your intrepid host how “politically correct” I am.

You are, without a doubt, one of the most pompous, arrogant, tight-assed and blusterous blowhards I have come across in a long time.  I would hate to live in a world where only ancient works were artistic enough to merit respect.

Art is fundamentally elitist.

No, YOU’RE fundementally elitist and you feel the need to apply that to everything around you in order to set yourself apart and feel special.

You don’t create anything do you?  You’re a critic (or at least am amateur one), aren’t you?  Boy...you know what they say about critics.  No matter what the art form, the critic is almost always a failed and frustrated wannabe.

Beautiful art is *everywhere* if you take the stick out of your ass and just *look*.

Lastly...A grammar flame?  Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick, you gotta be fucking kidding me.  The last resort of the truly pathetic in any online argument is to Godwin a discussion, but a grammar flame is a pretty close second.

Bottom line: You equate tattoos with “sluttiness.” The nerve you struck wasn’t personal, chief...my wife doesn’t even have her ears pierced much less have ink.  The only woman in my past with ink is someone I despise for reasons that have nothing to do with her colors.  I saw some dumb shit being said and I felt like commenting.  I’m simply pointing out that your opinions are being stated like fact when they’re *your* opinions, and clearly you have some serious issues.

Posted by Kilroy on 05/31/05 at 07:16 PM from United States

So then this is not you.  Not Poosh.

To funny, for the last year. I thought I was talking to a England Punk Scene cross dresser. 

To funny.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 07:17 PM from United Kingdom

SHIT

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 07:26 PM from United States

This should end the debate

Had to be posted.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 07:26 PM from United Kingdom

Before it all gets angry and stuff in here, if you have the time, drop over here and have a go at gods big cock / alan. He’s a dirty commie. If you’ve got spare time to read it all, do rip into him a little. Some of you love that stuff and it’s better directed at a commie.

Oh, and he hits women. My mate in fact.

To quote the creep:

that is why i hit you-yes i am sorry i did that but you had the responsibility of not provoking me-which of course you did!

Before we fight with eachother, how about giving it a go and ripping into the female-hitting communist?

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 07:29 PM from United States

Jimmy, you seem to be the one getting all hot and bothered here with the ad hominems.  Since you have not evidently comprehended what I have written (while offering a rather speculative profile of me personally) I don’t see why I should waste any more of my time on you.

One thing is for sure, though.  It was more fun to talk about tattooed, trashy women (of which traits everyone here - with 2 exceptions I remember so far - agrees there is disproportiate overlap)and the experiences of sighting them in their natural habitat.  I guess aesthetics naturally come in on a discussion of tattoos, but I’m sorry I brought it up. Now clit piercing - that is a good indication of sexual promiscuity, do we all agree ?  :)

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 07:35 PM from United Kingdom

How many pornstars have tattoos? I don’t know. But I’m guessing none of them.

So that proves you wrong David W in my own crazy world.

And let’s say I was married and had my wife’s web-site branded onto my arse. Would that make me promiscuous?

I think not.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 07:37 PM from United States

How many pornstars have tattoos? I don’t know. But I’m guessing none of them.

jenna jameson has at least one that i know of.

Posted by David W on 05/31/05 at 07:46 PM from United States

LOL, Poosh, that’s pretty good. 

there has to be a good web-based game in this: ‘pin the tattoo on the porn starlet’

Posted by Aaron - Free Will on 05/31/05 at 07:50 PM from United States

I’m gonna go pierce my clit and hump the Dallas Cowboys.

....We want pictures! *stomp*stomp*clap*clap* We want pictures!
Posted by Kilroy on 05/31/05 at 07:53 PM from United States

Raquel Darrian has a black panter, on the ass.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 07:56 PM from United Kingdom

Wow. I should so get into porn.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 07:58 PM from United Kingdom

starting.... now!

Posted by Miguelito on 05/31/05 at 08:01 PM from United States

Something that’s artistic doesn’t have to necessarily be great art - just art. Art can suck too. But saying that something is art *only* if it’s popular for a certain period of time is just narrow-minded.

Yeah.. I agree with that too.  But I do agree with him in a way.. that just because some fool splats some paint on a canvas, it doesn’t necessarily make it art.  I could draw some stick figures… doesn’t make it art.  The main problem is that art is just subjective.. there’s no hard and fast rules (though there are those that think there are.. and they’re wrong).

Personally, my definition of art would include some actual effort from the artist, some emotional aspect to it, and some imaginative thinking.  That’s one reason I don’t personaly count as art a lot of the crap that’s just paint splattered on the canvas… any idiot can do that.  Not everyone can paint something that moves most people that see it, sculpt well, etc. 

Then again, I don’t see stupid pranks like the guy that put all the yellow umbrellas along the California coast as “art” either.. that’s just someone with too much time on his hands and no real job to speak of.

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 08:04 PM from United States

Posted by Aaron - Free Will on 05/31 at 05:50 PM

I’m gonna go pierce my clit and hump the Dallas Cowboys.

....We want pictures! *stomp*stomp*clap*clap* We want pictures!

No, no, Aaron. It’s *clap*clap* first, and then the *stomp*stomp*

Get it right. Jeeze. ;-)

Posted by Miguelito on 05/31/05 at 08:04 PM from United States

Should’ve added to last post…

I guess it just bothers me that so many people lately use “art” as an all-encompasing blanket to shield themselves whenever they do anything stupid that they know will piss of most people.  Like the “piss christ” stuff, the idiots that put the guard towers near walls of gated communities, and call it “guerrilla art.” etc…

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 08:07 PM from United Kingdom

"If I can do it, it’s not art.”

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 08:15 PM from United States

Has anyone ever seen that Charlie Sheen/Denise Richards movie called “Good Advice”. There is one scene where Charlie is going out with Angie Harmon to a performance art exhibition, where some asshat performs what he refers to as ‘Enemart’, where he “accepts the paint into his body” (through an enema bag and appropriate attachment(s)) and then “projection expels it onto the canvas”.

*blinkblink*

And people were taking this guy seriously.

People, if you have to actually BE THERE to “get” the artist’s message, the artist has failed. Which means that he’s gonna need an NEA grant to keep from being forced to actually WORK for a living.

Posted by Miguelito on 05/31/05 at 08:26 PM from United States

People, if you have to actually BE THERE to “get” the artist’s message, the artist has failed. Which means that he’s gonna need an NEA grant to keep from being forced to actually WORK for a living.

Heh.. ding ding ding… Nail on head.. some other cliched phrases… :)

BTW, first thing I thought of when you mentioned that movie and “performance art” is the scene in The Big Lebowski where his landlord dances.  Goofy stuff..  Just watched that again this weekend.

Posted by JimK on 05/31/05 at 08:36 PM from United States

Now clit piercing - that is a good indication of sexual promiscuity, do we all agree ?  :)

OK, fair enough.  Clit pierced: being a humpity-hump is more likely than not.  I’ll accept that as a rule of thumb.

See, what you want to do is take the thumb and rub it gently over.......

Wait wrong discussion.  My bad.  Uhh...art.  Paint pooping, was it?  Yeah, I’m not for it.

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 08:41 PM from United States

*rolleyes* LOL

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 09:14 PM from United States

Yep, girls should definately not “ugly themselves up” with a tatoo.  I mean, damn, that could actually show some individuality and mar their only useful talent, which is, of course, to get guys to see her as a sex object.  Besides, inks only for guys right?

If you don’t like tatooes, whatever, but don’t be bastards to those girls who do like them.

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 09:24 PM from United States

I have to say I dig girls with tattoos. I have one of my own. Large coloful ones that can’t be hidden can cause a problem IMHO.

Has anyone here ever spent any time around “bikers”? It’s been some time, but I remember everyone of them had at least one and it was often a subject of discussion.

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 09:24 PM from United Kingdom

Any of you guys out there dig ink on chicks?  Can you explain it to me?

In case you didn’t catch it, Lee - here’s my answer.

I hope I have changed your mind.

Posted by Lee on 05/31/05 at 09:57 PM from United States

I hope I have changed your mind.

Not in the slightest. :)

Posted by Poosh on 05/31/05 at 09:58 PM from United Kingdom

My Jedi mind tricks are not working…

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 10:07 PM from United States

These are not the tattoos you’re looking for…

Posted by on 05/31/05 at 10:10 PM from United States

Poosh: Some of those chicks are downright *fugly*. I can understand the tats though - it’s like “hey, don’t look at my face, look at this over here!”

Purely survival instinct.

Posted by HARLEY on 05/31/05 at 10:19 PM from United States

one or 2 nice tats are ok with me, I for one have none, but have been thinking about getting the US flag tattoed on my arm.
but hey, its all about personal chioce, a chick with a assload of tats is disgusting....

<a href="http://home.centurytel.net/harley002/Family and dogs/jessiestat.jpg” target="_new">My Wifes Tatto</a>

Posted by HARLEY on 05/31/05 at 10:26 PM from United States

<a href="http://home.centurytel.net/harley002/Family and dogs/jessiestat.jpg” target="_new">my wifes tatto</a>

screwed that one up.

The plan is to get a rose for every child we have.

I seen sone nice tattos and sone nasty ones on women, i jsut dont got for the ones that cover the Whole of the body,
or ones that are distracting from the woman herself.

I think some of ya, have a stick up your ass over this, but then agian, it is art, and it is in the eye of the beholder.

Posted by Tj on 05/31/05 at 11:56 PM from United States

*whispers* I have a tattoo..

Posted by Drumwaster on 05/31/05 at 11:57 PM from United States

*whispers back* Let’s see it.

Posted by Tj on 06/01/05 at 12:03 AM from United States

I don’t have any photos of it, but I got it when I was 26, shortly after my 2nd child was born.  I was married, faithful and I don’t drink or do drugs.  It’s on my left breast, able to be hidden by clothes and the reasons I got it are quite simple.  It was in honor of my kids.

It’s 2 hearts with fireworks-looking things behind them, the colors are pink/garnet for my daughter and her b-day month.. and blue/purple for my son and his b-day month.  It’s about 1.5 inches square and if I do say so myself it’s very tastefully done. :)

Posted by Drumwaster on 06/01/05 at 12:11 AM from United States

Are you gonna make me repeat myself? {tapping foot on floor}

Posted by Starving Writer on 06/01/05 at 12:13 AM from United States

I hope I have changed your mind.

That girl on the top, the hot one with the angel tattoo on her stomach?

All I’m thinking is “man, she’d be hot if only she didn’t have that tattoo right there.”

I don’t mind small tattoos on women as long as they’re tastefully done.  A small one on her ankle, the small of her back, or the top of her breasts don’t really bother me.  Or even a wrap-around on her upper arm (see: Faith from Buffy the Vampire Slayer).  It’s the overly huge one that is really distracting.  I just can’t find that sexy at all.

But that’s me.  Obviously, YMMV.

Posted by Helo on 06/01/05 at 12:18 AM from United States

She was sleeved.  She didn’t look like she was into the hardcore tattoo scene, she looked like a gal who made a really bad decision.  And I was just curious if there was anyone out here who liked this sort of thing, and if so, could you explain the appeal.

I’ve seen a lot of women who do that, and I think it’s disgusting. Unless they plan on wearing long sleeves for the rest of their life, they can kiss a great job goodbye.

Which brings me to my next point --- people who bitch about not being able to get a job because they happen to be sleeved or have tattoos, piercings, etc. They point out their amazing talent, and how the fact that they got “overlooked” because they’re “different” is “bullshit.” The fact of the matter is that no employer wants someone who looks like they’re in the band Orgy presenting to investors, or anyone else for that matter.

I’d also like to take the time to point out that I just linked to the MTV website, something which I’m more than positive will get me banned from Lee’s website.

(it’s been nice knowing you all! *sniff sniff*)

;)

Posted by Tj on 06/01/05 at 12:21 AM from United States

The artist who did it (looks at that stuffy guy who rambled about what art is and isn’t) took pictures of it.  Wouldn’t it be wild if there’s a pic of my tatt on the net?  :-o

I’ll look but this was almost 15 years ago.

Posted by Tj on 06/01/05 at 12:26 AM from United States

Newp.  Their site has competitions they’ve done since 2000 but no past customer pics.  Ain’t it a shame.

Posted by Drumwaster on 06/01/05 at 12:30 AM from United States

Yeah. If only there was some invention that could be pointed at something and capture an image of that thing for posterity and sharing with friends and family, all with just the push of a button…

Damn that lazy science!

Posted by Tj on 06/01/05 at 12:36 AM from United States

I’m barely in the 90’s, a digital camera won’t be on the scene here for another 7.5 years if history is any guide.

Posted by Tj on 06/01/05 at 12:39 AM from United States

Nick, I couldn’t agree with you more.  People with loud tattoos, green hair, things of that nature are not professional looking and right or wrong, won’t get certain jobs.

Image counts.

Posted by on 06/01/05 at 02:07 AM from United States

TJ I have a few on myself to. Not ashamed at all.

Posted by on 06/01/05 at 02:12 AM from United States

"Tramp stamp” has now made its way into my vocabulary.

Posted by on 06/01/05 at 02:35 AM from United States

I think I like “Slut Bar Code”. And what’s odd is I think those tatoos on the small of the back are sexy.

Posted by The Fly on 06/01/05 at 08:21 PM from United States

For once, Lee, I’m with you.  When I get married someday, I hope that the only tattoos on my wife’s body are the outlines of my hands on her ass so that I can grip with some consistency.

Next entry: Fly the Deadly Skies

Previous entry: Speaking of Bangkok...

<< Back to main