Nadya305 wrote:
No wonder your friends are limited...Who the hell wants to work with a pesimist!

Jessalyn_54 wrote:
as the others said......the uninformed tattoo hater has arrived!

Neither of these comments are relevant.

a)  I've got a healthy list of friends on my portfolio, and I can say that I know and/or have worked with them for the most part.  What relevance would having strangers on my friends list have to this discussion?  Exactly what number of friends would impress you?

b)  Where am I uninformed, and how is that relevant?
     >>>  If you are not a culinary school graduate, how do you know what kind
            of food you like the best?
     >>>  If you are not an architect, how can you know where you like to live?


So, instead of trying to insult me, how 'bout you contributing to my education?  As I just asked in a recent post -- how does getting a tattoo today differ from 1950s youths dressing & speaking like a beatnik or how 1960s youths dressing & speaking like hippies?

Lamonica wrote:
Very true... my two friends went to get their nipples pierced... one cried and freaked out, the other had an orgasm... It all just depends on how well you cope with pain and your nerves.

Uhm I'd like to meet the second friend 

Looknsee Photography wrote:

Nadya305 wrote:
No wonder your friends are limited...Who the hell wants to work with a pesimist!

Neither of these comments are relevant.

a)  I've got a healthy list of friends on my portfolio, and I can say that I know and/or have worked with them for the most part.  What relevance would having strangers on my friends list have to this discussion?  Exactly what number of friends would impress you?

b)  Where am I uninformed, and how is that relevant?
     >>>  If you are not a culinary school graduate, how do you know what kind
            of food you like the best?
     >>>  If you are not an architect, how can you know where you like to live?


So, instead of trying to insult me, how 'bout you contributing to my education?  As I just asked in a recent post -- how does getting a tattoo today differ from 1950s youths dressing & speaking like a beatnik or how 1960s youths dressing & speaking like hippies?

I'll answer you!! 

Ignoring the part about friends.

This is not about you not liking tattoos, so your examples in b isn't relevant.  This thread still isn't about which photographers don't like tattoos, it's about why models have them in a specific location.

Getting a tattoo today doesn't differ from being a beatnik or a hippie.  Except that I hate hippies.  "God I hate hippies."  There.  Are you happy?  You're right, the rest of us "tattooed, gum chewing freaks" are wrong.  Will you shut up now?

Looknsee Photography wrote:
I'll even go further -- I would contend that many of you with tattoos today wouldn't have gotten them if they hadn't been popular before you got them.

Almost 11 years ago I got my first tattoo. At that point in time, no tattoos were not as popular as they are today. Especially not in the bible belt where I live. They were frowned upon and still are. I did not get tattoos to jump a cool kid bandwagon because at that time there was no "cool kid bandwagon" to join.

Envy wrote:

Almost 11 years ago I got my first tattoo. At that point in time, no tattoos were not as popular as they are today. Especially not in the bible belt where I live. They were frowned upon and still are. I did not get tattoos to jump a cool kid bandwagon because at that time there was no "cool kid bandwagon" to join.

Did you ever know that you're my hero?

Lamonica wrote:

Did you ever know that you're my hero?

You just want to jump on my bandwagon don't you?!

Envy wrote:

You just want to jump on my bandwagon don't you?!

You've figured me out....

But, only if you let me

Lamonica wrote:

You've figured me out....

But, only if you let me

*scoots over*

Come on. While you're here you can sign this card for Looknsee.

Lamonica wrote:

Dammit... you beat me to it...haha... I hate closed minded individuals... yes, I said hate...

Hey look! It's the tattoo hater hater!  ;-)

Looknsee Photography wrote:
Neither of these comments are relevant.

a)  I've got a healthy list of friends on my portfolio, and I can say that I know and/or have worked with them for the most part.  What relevance would having strangers on my friends list have to this discussion?  Exactly what number of friends would impress you?

b)  Where am I uninformed, and how is that relevant?
     >>>  If you are not a culinary school graduate, how do you know what kind
            of food you like the best?
     >>>  If you are not an architect, how can you know where you like to live?


So, instead of trying to insult me, how 'bout you contributing to my education?  As I just asked in a recent post -- how does getting a tattoo today differ from 1950s youths dressing & speaking like a beatnik or how 1960s youths dressing & speaking like hippies?

please see my response to your post on the previous page about your "study" of anthropology and sociology. and you are uninformed because you do not know anything about tattoos, tattoo culture, the history of tattoos, and so on. this has been evident in recent and past posts/threads. that's why many of us made the comments towards you that we have, because it is very evident that the information you have used to support your arguments has been taken out of context and you're just using it to support your bias.

you have been told many times in the past that you do not know what you are talking about, I'm not the only one who has said it.

Jessalyn_54 wrote:
you shouldn't say that you studied anthropology and sociology if you just took a few ideas from a few random books. that's not studying anthropology and socially, that's taking other peoples ideas and forming them to fit and support your own opinions.

Who said I read books.  I said I studied it, as in got my undergraduate degree in.

Jessalyn_54 wrote:
I have not studied sociology so I will not speak on that subject (though I have studied a few well known pioneering sociologists of the 18th-19th centuries) but if you had studied anthropology in the real sense that a subject should be studied and used in an argument, then I'm sorry to say you must have missed the whole point. You cannot judge a person and their cultural values, choices, etc based on your own bias. we then end up condemning those that are not like ourselves.

Who said I was doing any such thing?  I just said that getting a tattoo today is very similar to wearing a goatee in the 1950s or wearing tie-dye clothing in the 1960s.  All are rights of passage that indicates membership of a culture.

In fact, tattoos have been symbols of membership in a cultural group for centuries.  Tribal tattoos, almost by definition, indicate membership in a tribe.  Military groups used tattoos to form esprit de corps.  Noblemen got tattoos as soon as the king got tattoos. 

So, that's my point.  What point am I missing?

Jessalyn_54 wrote:
you are letting the bias fact that you find tattoos personally disgusting influence your ideas about popular culture, fads, and the choices that everyone else will make. Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual human's beliefs and activities make sense in terms of his or her own culture. my culture is different than your culture. we may be part of the universal american culture but how can we even define that anymore? a universal american culture is too general, so I would definitely say that my culture is different than your culture. you could call them sub-cultures if so desired, but I tend to subscribe to the idea that there is not 1 universal american culture. therefore you should practive cultural relativism before you start trashing other peoples cultural values and beliefs.

I would agree -- tattoos are part of a subculture.  I'd go further -- for decades (heck, for centuries), emerging subcultures tend to find modes of expression that older, more established subcultures would find unusual, inappropriate, etc.  I'd even go so far as to postulate that if a subculture can't offend the older generation, it is not likely to be "cool" or to last long. 

So, why the insulting backlash when I say that I find tattoos distracting & unsuitable for the photography I want to make?

Jessalyn_54 wrote:
you may be talking about those people out there that get tattoos to be cool but there is no statistic to tell us what percentage of tattooed people fit in that category, and I think it's obvious that you aren't preaching to that crowd here.

Yes, there are no statistics.  There are no facts.  There are only opinions.  I'd even go further to postulate that some people who think that they are getting tattoos for personal reasons are at least in part doing so so that they can be members of the tattooed subculture also.

Matt Towler wrote:

Hey look! It's the tattoo hater hater!  ;-)

Yep, that's how I roll... hehe

Envy wrote:

*scoots over*

Come on. While you're here you can sign this card for Looknsee.

Me too, me too!!

RayAndrews wrote:
Ahhh, yes the thread on the dreaded "tramp stamp" ...well that's what it's called in certain circles...interesting...I can take or leave them photo-wise...guess just beating into submission about the body art on that part of the body.

I call them ass antlers.

Envy wrote:

*scoots over*

Come on. While you're here you can sign this card for Looknsee.

Unless it's a gag card, I'm going to pass... I'm not too fond of him right about now...

Looknsee Photography wrote:
In fact, tattoos have been symbols of membership in a cultural group for centuries.  Tribal tattoos, almost by definition, indicate membership in a tribe.  Military groups used tattoos to form esprit de corps.  Noblemen got tattoos as soon as the king got tattoos. 

So, that's my point.  What point am I missing?

WOW! You should all go back and read the thread that I referenced earlier that Looknsee participated in. He kept saying that tattoos were a passing fad, etc. etc. and the rest of us kept telling him that no, tattoos are not a passing fad.

This quote from Looknsee if exactly what I was telling him in that thread!

Melissa Lynnette wrote:
Huh, then I screwed up because I don't consider myself a part of cool youth culture.  I am not overloooking that many young people don't put that much thought into their tattoos, my best friend has Hello Kitty tattooed on her ass.  She's insane for that.  Eve, the rapper, has admitted the paw prints on her tits were a dare she lost.  I get it! 
And why exactly are you so against trends and rites of passage?  My first tattoo is, in fact, tied in with the rites of passage ceremony I participated in when I graduated high school.  If anything, you should be blasting me for my navel ring.  I only did that because all my friends had it.

I think I'm being misunderstood.  Like anyone else, I know plenty of people with tattoos, and many of my close friends have them.  As people here have pointed out, some are meaningful and some are exceedingly stupid (I know a woman with a Playboy bunny on her shoulder -- I know another woman with "SUP" on her chest that looks like a bored kid doodled on her skin with a ball point pen during detention).

I'm a big believer in individual freedoms, and what people want to do with their bodies is their own business.

I will state emphatically that I find tattoos to be distracting & inappropriate in my photography, and since there are pleny of suitable models available to me, I would not bother working with a model who has a tattoo on a body part that I want to phtograph.

I also think that tattoos are a cultural phenomenon -- in fact, I think it has bigger significance than people give it credit.  Traditionally, tattoos would indicate membership in a tribe or group, and I think it still serves that purpose today.

Envy wrote:
*scoots over*

Come on. While you're here you can sign this card for Looknsee.

Lamonica wrote:
Unless it's a gag card, I'm going to pass... I'm not too fond of him right about now...

we can put a little gift certificate for a tattoo in the card too. with a heavy handed tattoo artist so it's scars really bad

or we could put a smiley face temporary tattoo in their for him to sport for a few days since he thinks tattoos are just a passing fad

Jessalyn_54 wrote:

WOW! You should all go back and read the thread that I referenced earlier that Looknsee participated in. He kept saying that tattoos were a passing fad, etc. etc. and the rest of us kept telling him that no, tattoos are not a passing fad.

This quote from Looknsee if exactly what I was telling him in that thread!

Noooo... it can't be... he's studied it in college! hahaha... This thread keeps getting more and more hilarious, but I'm off to my doctors appointment.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

Some, I'd say.  I have studied anthropology & sociology, and I am known to be observant.

So, here's my thinking.  In the mid-1950s, many young people were beatniks.  They were "expressing themselves" with their appearance, but they wound up dressing similarly & talking similarly.  Were they being original if all of them wore goatees & black clothing & played the bongos (in other words, how original can they be if their dress & vocabulary conformed to group rules)?  In the 1960s, many young people were "expressing themselves" by being hippies, and although they claimed to appreciate individuality, they all tended to wear long hair & colorful clothing & bell bottoms. 

From my perspective, I don't see the difference between beatniks all dressing similarly, hippies all dressing similarly, and the current group of youth who feel that getting tattoos is a form of self-expression.  While you may overlook that exceedingly few tattoos are in fact unique, from my perspective, getting a tattoo is a rite of passage -- it get's you membership into that cool youth culture.

So, what's the difference between someone "expressing themselves" with black clothes & bongos, someone with long hair & psychedelic clothes, and someone with tattoos?

I'll even go further -- I would contend that many of you with tattoos today wouldn't have gotten them if they hadn't been popular before you got them.

That wasn't really the smartest thing to say. Please keep in mind that while many colleges teach anthropology as a subject within sociology, they do this for their convenience, not because it actually it part of sociology.

Sociology is the study of groups within a culture, while
Anthropology is the study of the development and structure of whole cultures

While your observations on american youth sociology may be correct (15 year olds need to belong to a group to define themselves as individuals seperate from their parents.) Its not that teenagers want to be totally unique, that would be very lonely and depresing, they simply don't want to be a momma's boy/girl anymore.

However: anthropologically speaking, tatoos are a cultural expression of personal history. Litterally who you are and where you came from. Culture by culture see tattoos in quite a different light. In placed like Borneo, the wrong tatoo in the wrong part of the jungle may still get you a hatchet to the back of the skull. In some north american tribes, tatoos are seen as inferior, and were placed on captives and slaves. Other tribes exalted tatoos as symbols of strength, and the more you had, the higher your standing in said tribe.

That said, all tatoos, in one way or another represent who you are and where you came from, where you were when the tat was done. I'm not a personally fan of flash or fake tribal, but for all intensive purposes, thats mentally where the wearer was at at the time they got it. If a vain pretty girl wants a vain pretty tatoo, more power to her. If she wants a les obscure tatoo that will be interpretted by the masses as "more" meaningful because of its obscurity, more power to her.

If she's got the balls to sit through it, I'm cool with her. My theory on people who look down on tatoos: Well You must just feel emasculated cause I've got the brass cojones and you don't.

Getting my tatoo had nothing to do with being cool or being part of a group. It in fact nearly got me fired from my job at a church camp (ironically, the tats a cross...) If I wanted to fit in, I'd be nicer to people I hate. Regardless, I've wanted my tat since I was 7 or 8, really almost as long as I can remember. It's never been a problem at a photoshoot, some like it some don't. But I had it done in orange specifically so that it can be covered (and very easily by the way) with body makeup.

Now that I'm pregnant, I'm starting to look at designs for my second tat, and hopefully will get it soon after having my little one. I'm still very early in the design process but am looking into a runic design centering around my name and seveal facets of femininity and motherhood.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
I also think that tattoos are a cultural phenomenon -- in fact, I think it has bigger significance than people give it credit.  Traditionally, tattoos would indicate membership in a tribe or group, and I think it still serves that purpose today.

wow for being an undergrad student in anthropology that statement was very axiomatic.

everything we do is a cultural phenomenon. duh

Looknsee Photography wrote:
So?  What's your point?

That just means that I chose to support myself in ways other than photography.  That doesn't necessarily mean I am unskilled.

I hit a nerve...!The only thing that you are skilled at is demeaning and judging others.Who are you to judge anyone on here you're not God...No one asked for your half a cent comments...Seriously you need to seek some therapy for that condition of yours!!!

Looknsee Photography wrote:

I think I'm being misunderstood.  Like anyone else, I know plenty of people with tattoos, and many of my close friends have them.  As people here have pointed out, some are meaningful and some are exceedingly stupid (I know a woman with a Playboy bunny on her shoulder -- I know another woman with "SUP" on her chest that looks like a bored kid doodled on her skin with a ball point pen during detention).

I'm a big believer in individual freedoms, and what people want to do with their bodies is their own business.

I will state emphatically that I find tattoos to be distracting & inappropriate in my photography, and since there are pleny of suitable models available to me, I would not bother working with a model who has a tattoo on a body part that I want to phtograph.

I also think that tattoos are a cultural phenomenon -- in fact, I think it has bigger significance than people give it credit.  Traditionally, tattoos would indicate membership in a tribe or group, and I think it still serves that purpose today.

What do you think we've been misunderstanding?

Envy wrote:
I wish he would just let go and give a tattooed girl a hug.

I LOVE going around and giving tattooed chicks a hug, but damn, it gets me all kinds of trouble.

byReno wrote:

I LOVE going around and giving tattooed chicks a hug, but damn, it gets me all kinds of trouble.

nuh-uh! I accept hugs every day of the week

Molly Black wrote:
I started getting piercings and tattoos over fourteen years ago.

My mom (who I don't get along with normally) has a dragon eating a rose on her upper left thigh. She got a butterfly in the 60s that was terrible and then did a gorgeous coverup later on (the late 70s, I believe).

Neither she, nor my peers, were influences in my piercings (she hates them which makes me laugh since she equates ANY piercing with the Story of O for some reason) and I was the first person to get one in my crowd by years. I had to go to a paralegal's apartment in Boston with a friend where before the paralegal went to work he sterilized the area, used a brand new needle (he had lots of friends in the "scene" of BDSM where that's taken very seriously), and I had my first piercing. Then I just kept getting more. And more.

I have three spaces from where I had them in my belly button area, but I took them out when I decided I didn't want them anymore. No big deal.

My tattoos? Definitely not for anybody but myself - I'm 37 for heaven's sake. I don't need to be in a clique.

The last one on my upper back which I got gifted by a talented tattoo artist by (she gifted the design custom made for me and my husband and then tattood them in the same exact spots on our upper backs). That was for him and it was for me. And he did it for the same reason. And it was done at a shop where they make you sign forms and if they smell alcohol you're out and all the regular stuff that any shop that's worth the money you normally pay (she's about $200/hr now) because they could lose their license and it's not worth that when you're a talented artist who commands the prices her shop commands (well the shop she works at, it belongs to another one of the artists).

Oh and SLE: I've got an image of my breeding parts spread out that one of my friends has as his wallpaper and I have as an icon for one of my journals. I usually use it for when I'm writing about my "FMS pain flare days." Good to see I'm not the only one with that sort of humor.

*heh*

I caught it in your LJ earlier 

And my ex mother-in-law got a full front torso tattoo at 50.  Within a few weeks prior to her birthday, she'd finalized her 3rd divorce, recoverd from a full hysterectomy due to cancer & passed her 1 year clean mark, & her youngest kid moved out.  She called me & said "I'm 50, clean, single, and the kids are out.  Take me to a good woman tattoo artist."
She's a Draconian Wiccan and the image of the World Dragon helped her thru the rough transition, so she got a full chest piece of a dragon wrapped around the world with its head between her breasts and the tip of its tail where you'd need to be a REALLY good friend to see it (no, I never did, perverts).  It was a multi week process of very long sessions and VERY meaningful to her.  Right of passage yes.  Cheap, tacky, or conformist, no.

Saryn Angel wrote:
I agree - too many people get tattoos without thinking them through - and flash is annoying and obnoxious and definately should be banned... but it's a money maker.  A lot of artists wouldn't survive without the idiots who want a taz on their shoulder or a tough guy arm band...

Yep, that was what I said
And the sad part is that it DOES cheapen the overall affect for those who're more serious about it.

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
I find the irony here in that while some say they got their tattoos for personal expression, those same people are slamming others expressing their opinion about tattoos.

I agree with Look for the most part (my previous post addresses the specific topic), but I find it interesting that some have resorted to name calling and similar tactics in defense of their own tattoos. Odd.

there is more to it than that. I am only responding to the posts by Looknsee because of the way he goes about expressing his opinions, not because of his actual opinion. if he doesn't like tattoos (or anyone for that matter) that is totally fine. it's how he trashing on tattoos and tattooed people is what we have a problem with. I have not responded to looknsee or anyone elses opinon for that matter and said "your opinion is wrong" it's more of "your FACTS are wrong"

byReno wrote:

I LOVE going around and giving tattooed chicks a hug, but damn, it gets me all kinds of trouble.

*hug*

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
I find the irony here in that while some say they got their tattoos for personal expression, those same people are slamming others expressing their opinion about tattoos.

I agree with Look for the most part (my previous post addresses the specific topic), but I find it interesting that some have resorted to name calling and similar tactics in defense of their own tattoos. Odd.

Could you point out where we called Looknsee names?  It's possible it happened, I simply can't recall.

Envy wrote:

jennifer lockstedt wrote:
2. any where that you get a tattoo hurts...even if your drunk off your ass.....

Envy wrote:
I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but you have been falsely "school-ed" . No one should ever drink alcohol or take Advil for that matter before or during a tattoo. It will thin your blood, causing you to bleed more which can make your tattoo look like shit when it's healed.

I don't know what type of tattoo artists you are going to , but it appears it would be ones that accept a six pack of Budweiser as payment and not a Visa. An artist can have their license revoked for tattooing anyone under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Not to mention is just plain fucking stupid. Anyone that is willing to tattoo someone  while they are intoxicated won't see a penny from me. If they are willing to tattoo drunks I can only imagine the other things they overlook too. Such as properly autoclaved or fresh needles.

I am just dying to see the top notch tattoo work you have done.
*oozing sarcasm*


Try educating yourself before you make yourself look like a complete jackass.
http://www.bmezine.com/

once again if you think they would turn down money you are crazy....... they take the risk honey.......because they don't get caught........ get a clue on the real world and how sneaky that it is.......everyone cheats the system...... so before you make a statement about me being uneducated...... first get a resume and post it..... right before you post your stupid come backs......only to get slammed on.............................j