Reassure me that all tatooed, pierced young people aren't drug using losers

07DAD · November 7, 2012, 10:13am

I am 62. At least in my circle, the invisible/irrelevant postmenopausal women self-identity does not seem to exist. My contemporaries include full partners/shareholders in professional companies, business owners and department heads. They radiate confidence, power and economic muscle. They are the manufacturer/media’s traget for many of the highest ticket items.

<a href=“http://www.medialifemagazine.com:8080/news1999/july99/news3712.html[/url]”>http://www.medialifemagazine.com:8080/news1999/july99/news3712.html</a>

The closest analogy to the tat situation seems to be cosmetic surgery. Is a middle-aged woman who has a lot of “work” done “deviant” since most women don’t have it done? Is it a rebellion against the fact of life of aging/death? Is it a rejection of the things that make her who she is. I recall that the late Queen Mother rejected an offical portrait done of her in the 2 or 3 years before her death. The artist had painted her without her wrinkles and she said that they were her badges of wisdom.

Or, is it simply the choice of the woman who does it because she likes how she feels after it is done? I don’t think one can make a general assumption about the lameness of a restructured/renovated woman seeking permanent physical modifications anymore than you can about the lameness of a person with tattoos.

[Casting</a> a New Dream of Old Age | Disruptive Demographics | Big Think](<a href=“http://bigthink.com/disruptive-demographics/casting-a-new-dream-of-old-age]Casting”>Casting a New Dream of Old Age - Big Think)

cromette · November 7, 2012, 10:26am

Yea, my barrista has facial piercings too. She’s great. I don’t think it’s unusual for my barrista to have facial piercings - it’s not an unusual setting for such.

But the CEO or the sales manager for a corporation in my industry would not have facial piercings.

absweetmarie · November 7, 2012, 10:26am

You are my hero, 07DAD.

Perimenopausally yours,
absweetmarie

alh · November 7, 2012, 10:37am

and now going wildly off-topic :eek:

for all those in perimenopause -
after surviving a few years of very dense hormonal clouds -
I feel incredibly powerful as a postmenopausal woman, even more powerful than during my childbearing and rearing years when I always was imagining myself as some sort of fertility goddess/Magna Mater. I embrace signs of aging. However, I am the sort of woman who regards her cesarean scar much as a dueling scar, a badge of courage and honor. I certainly don’t expect anyone else to share my particular fantasy life.

And veering back on topic: Hooray - Hooray- that we can dye and inject and whatever else, if we so choose! Or get some new tattoos celebrating the event.

Seriously, all my postmenopausal friends, with their children successfully launched and not needing so much of their attention, are really enjoying this phase of life.

Pizzagirl · November 7, 2012, 10:46am

And there you go - I see mine as merely a scar that has no other significance or meaning – very matter of fact, pragmatic - not even something to really “think” about in any way, to be honest. To me, it doesn’t have any badge status, nor does it signify courage or honor. It just signifies - oh, I had a c-section. Which to me is a neutral thing, too - not a sign of failure like some women may see it. But this is a whole other discussion.

FinanceGrad · November 7, 2012, 10:48am

Quote:
The pro-tat crowd has a right to get their tattoos and love them, and the anti-tat group has the right to think they’re lame. The pendulum swings both ways, and neither group has a justifiable reason to be upset about it.

My general sense is that the “pro-tat crowd” don’t sit around discussing how lame (or insert more neutral word choice) it is to have an untatted body. Is that correct? Maybe I’m wrong. I don’t think I’ve read a post here urging those who don’t care for tattoos to go right out and get one so they can fit in. The “anti-tat” individuals on this thread are pointing out the negatives of tattoos. Some of those posts could be seen as constructive advice to young people. Certainly not all the posts are that sort of posts. At a certain point, it seems to me, it devalues someone not to respect their thoughtful and informed decisions regarding personal presentation, even if their idea of what looks “right” is different than yours.

^^The point I was trying to make is that people should not be surprised that other people will judge (whether positively or negatively) them based on their choices about their outward appearance. When you tattoo or pierce your body in visible places you open yourself up for others to have an opinion of you based on your appearance.

When I made that post I was commenting on the fact that one poster was essentially calling tattoos bad judgment and a moral failure, and their opinion was deemed wrong by others. My point was that each side’s point of view, the tattood and happy and those who think tattoos are lame, are merely their opinions and not “wrong” as far as each side is concerned.

If I choose to alter my physical in any way I expect that some will agree and some will not, but it doesn’t make the person who doesn’t agree with my look inferior to someone who does.

07DAD · November 7, 2012, 10:58am

Or not, hopefully.

My long-term Ex is a 60 year old professional with a major Fortune 500 company. She has her home in Dallas but works over 65% of the year out of state. When she was in her early-mid 50’s she grew her very thick hair out for 2 years and stopped dying/touching up for the last year. Gray and not so shiny and totally not a fashionable length. She was doing this to donate her hair to a foundation that made wigs for women who had chemo for cancer. She did not make a public announcement of this fact.

Fast forward 3 years. She had a double mastectomy. And, a major regimen of chemo. Hair totally gone. She really wasn’t supposed to make it. She has now made it for 4 years. I call it karma. God bless her.

She told me that when she stopped dying and let it grow, she heard comments (behind her back) judging her as letting herself go and not looking professional.

It really is an assumption as to why anyone does anything about their person.

alh · November 7, 2012, 11:08am

^^Very good karma indeed. I agree with everything you are writing.

As I stated, though not clearly*, I, personally, embrace the outward signs of aging. I am gray on purpose. I think I look wonderful. I aspire to Georgia O’Keefe wrinkles. I will get there someday if I live long enough. In my particular self-centered fantasy life inner-world anything and everything to do with my appearance is pretty much a positive, including scars. I am quite full of myself. I celebrate myself.

I try to celebrate everyone else, too, though that is always more difficult and for me a life-long journey of discovering and trying to cast off sometimes almost subconscious prejudices. That journey to me is one of the joys of aging. Sometimes it seems to me I am going to be almost smart by the time I die.

*although I think language is very important, I can’t pretend I always use it correctly

absweetmarie · November 7, 2012, 11:22am

I do not think it is “wrong” to hold any particular belief about the wisdom or lack thereof in tattoos and piercing. I am just perplexed when people’s positions don’t budge at all, even in the face of information that contradicts their positions. If you’ve posited that people get tattoos and pursue extreme piercing to shock others, and then hear ample anecdotal data that contradicts that, why not acknowledge that your position may need some refinement? Maybe you still think most people do it to shock. But you now know that’s not everyone’s motivation. That’s just one example. My point is, why not make noises indicating you’ve been listening rather than waiting for someone to say something that irritates you?

I know what my position is on tattoos and piercing. I’m not for them. I’m still interested to hear what these bodily embellishments mean to other people.

I’ve also observed that people occasionally write posts in a style that takes full advantage of the cover provided by this board’s anonymity. I think it’s important for all of us to remember that there are actual people attached to the views we may think wrong-headed. I try to take to heart the idea that one shouldn’t say anything here that one wouldn’t say in real life. Having said that, I’ve gotten some nasty emails from people who seem to think if you’re not standing next to someone when you say something, it’s okay to be snarky and belligerent.

musicprnt · November 7, 2012, 11:26am

Just as an fyi, besides a cultural shift, the reason you see Tattoo parlors in numbers is because there was a change in laws. Up until not that many years ago, for example, Tattoo parlors were illegal in NYC technically (kind of one of those things that flew under the radar). Many places have revised their laws where tattoo shops are legal but regulated for safety standards (disposable needles, handling of ink, types of inks), and that is why you see a lot more of them, lot easier to open if you are legal and don’t fear being closed. It is amazing the number of places out there, within a couple of square mile radius if where I live in solid suburbia, there are probably 4 shops,amazing

absweetmarie · November 7, 2012, 11:37am

I am surprised that it has taken me this long to share a favorite stories that is tangentially related to the post that started this thread. When I lived in Austin in the 1980s, my broad social network included (a few degrees of separation) the legendary tattoo artist Mike “Rollo” Malone, who died a few years ago. A fair number of people in my crowd (not me) had significant meth habits. One of these people, the dutiful son to observant Jewish parents, commented to Rollo that his religion prevented him from getting a tattoo. Rollo responded, in a booming voice that was not unlike what you might expect Moses to have had, “You use speed. YOU HAVE NO RELIGION!”

dmd77 · November 7, 2012, 11:46am

Cromette said: " @ dmd77
"Yea, my barrista has facial piercings too. She’s great. I don’t think it’s unusual for my barrista to have facial piercings - it’s not an unusual setting for such.

"But the CEO or the sales manager for a corporation in my industry would not have facial piercings. "

Well… our sales manager and our general manager both have tattoos. Our CEO (my husband) does not. More than half our employees have tattoos. If we didn’t hire people with tattoos, we wouldn’t get people of the high caliber we do. But then… we’re looking for people who think bicycles are the best thing ever.

alh · November 7, 2012, 12:45pm

^^The point I was trying to make is that people should not be surprised that other people will judge (whether positively or negatively) them based on their choices about their outward appearance. When you tattoo or pierce your body in visible places you open yourself up for others to have an opinion of you based on your appearance.

When I made that post I was commenting on the fact that one poster was essentially calling tattoos bad judgment and a moral failure, and their opinion was deemed wrong by others. My point was that each side’s point of view, the tattood and happy and those who think tattoos are lame, are merely their opinions and not “wrong” as far as each side is concerned.

If I choose to alter my physical in any way I expect that some will agree and some will not, but it doesn’t make the person who doesn’t agree with my look inferior to someone who does.

financegrad: I think you are absolutely right that not liking tattoos doesn’t make you a bad person. and vice versa. My point is pretty much this: A bunch of happy tatted individuals were minding their own business off thread. They did not start a thread exhorting non-tatted individuals to give tatts a try, tell them life is better and more fun with tatts. I think most non-tatted posters have been genuinely altruistic in pointing out how tattoos may limit opportunities in life. I am not sure that has been everyone’s motivation. At what point does giving your opinion become disrespectful? ever? What purpose is served by speculating “why” they choose to get tatted? What is the point? Is quality of life for non-tatted folks diminished if tatted folks are happy?

Again, to be clear, tatted and happy people seem to be okay that there are un-tatted and happy people on this thread and in the world. Not all un-tatted people seem so okay with the reverse. or at least that is how I’m reading it all. ymmv

and yet another answer to pg’s" whatever for"

I care about this because usually minority groups (like tatted and happy) don’t (so far as I know) try and tell majority groups (un-tatted and happy) how to present or live. I don’t understand why the tatted and happy person is of any concern whatsoever to the non-tatted. Yes, of course, they get to voice their opinion. This is America. Why is it so important their anti-tatt opinion is heard? What is the point of the intense negativity? Are they really accepting the rights of individuals to be tatted if they so choose? Aren’t they saying, you can do what you want, but we only really accept you when you look like us and act like us

maybe I’m completely off base but that is my “whatever for” on this subject

Pizzagirl · November 7, 2012, 1:10pm

I do think some tatted individuals are a little bit naive, in the “but no one’s ever said a word to me about my tats!” sense, and therefore conclude that everyone just loves their look when indeed other people may be thinking - oh, ugh, look at the lovely bride with the big butterfly across her back, too bad, she’d look lovely otherwise. But - as long as people are keeping their mouths shut, so be it. I mean, I would - and have - viscerally thought - oh, ugh in those kinds of settings. But I’m not actually going to say anything to anybody; whatever for? It’s not my body and in the final analysis, if she’s happy, that’s all that counts.

absweetmarie · November 7, 2012, 1:25pm

I do think the “no one has ever said anything” comments are curious. Most people keep opinions of people’s clothing and accessories to themselves (or talk behind people’s backs!). I have never said a word to my employee who is pierced and tatted, even when he came to work with what I considered to be a singularly unattractive nose ring. I just thought, “I do hope that’s a temporary adornment.” It wasn’t. Oh, well. his style has no iimpact on his performance; people here know him, accept him, appreciate his contributions and get irritated with him just as they do with other colleagues. All of this is quite independent of his aesthetic choices. He knows when to tone down his look.

musicprnt · November 7, 2012, 1:27pm

There are real world consequences of many decisions we make, in terms of jobs and where we live and so forth, there is no doubt, and it is a naive person who thinks, for example, that having a facial piercing or a tatoo might hinder them in their job prospects in certain places. Even having certain kind of hair styles, for example a male with long hair and a beard, might get them rejected in certain quarters, or a young woman wearing a low cut top on a job interview could be summarily rejected…and sadly, even in this day and age, things people have no control over, like their height, the size of their nose, you name it, can influence whether they get hired. A very unattractive person or an incredibly good looking one can face discrimination, the beautiful woman may be assumed to be all about her looks (ironically, though, a good looking man generally will find their looks to be a positive, especially in certain fields).

Some places may not care, tech fields for the most part, unless maybe if you work for some uptight bank like UBS or a place like Goldman Sachs, you will see tech people with tattoos and earrings (on men) and so forth, and no one gives a crap because they have needed skills. Customer dealing positions are a lot more sensitive and it isn’t just the bias of the bosses, sales is still very,very traditional in many cases, it is still suit and tie/womens suit/conservative look in many cases (there are exceptions, of course), and there things like facial piercings and tattoos would be unacceptable. There is a Tattoo shop here in NYC down in Soho, I think it is the one featured on “NY Ink” run by the tall bald shaven guy, that won’t put on a tattoo that cannot be covered.

But those are decisions people make as part of their self expression, that is their right. On the other hand, if you are the bride with the butterfly tattoo on your back, and people don’t like the way it looks, well, that is your opinion, it is no different then the middle aged women I see wearing low cut tops and leggings with outrageous high heels that are best left to a younger woman 30 pounds lighter, but that is their right to wear those things, or the short male dentist down the block who drives a full size Hummer to appear like he is a macho dude, so be it, what I think doesn’t really matter if it makes him feel happy, so be it shrug. There are tattoos I find attractive, including seeing a girl with her arm sleeved that normally I don’t find attractive, but hers was a floral tattoo that looked great, and to be honest I don’t find lip piercings particularly attractive or eyebrow rings or the thing where they have their ear lobes stretched, but there are other types I find kind of neat looking shrug (I think with the mouth piercings, it also makes me cringe, I tend to get mouth sores if my gums just get scratched, can’t imagine what that would do ouch).

Pizzagirl · November 7, 2012, 1:32pm

Ok, this might be controversial, but would a tattoo be a deal-breaker if you were dating somebody? I could likely overlook whatever the male equivalent is of the small-rose-on-the-ankle, or a small stud earring, but I would have a hard time aesthetically getting past someone who had, say, a huge tattoo covering half his back, or sleeves, or gauges in the ears, or something of that nature.

Then again, I’d feel smoking is a similar deal-breaker.

alh · November 7, 2012, 1:35pm

so -bride with exposed butterfly tattoo

PG and I sit in the audience, silently disagreeing with this particular aesthetic choice.

Two 20-somethings behind us think the tattoo totally makes the dress work. Without it she would look just … lame. you know. like our moms.

Whose reality is real? How do we decide? Seriously.

FinanceGrad · November 7, 2012, 1:49pm

“Ok, this might be controversial, but would a tattoo be a deal-breaker if you were dating somebody?”

Ok, I’ll bite. For me it would depend on the person. Say I met a man who had a large tattoo on his chest/back/arm/leg whatever, and he happened to get that one for some reason, but had no intention of expanding his “collection” then I wouldn’t have any problem. Really the type of guy I am thinking of in this situation is one who got a tat while in college, the army, or some similar situation as a young adult then matured and developed other hobbies.

Now on the other hand if he had a big tattoo with intentions on getting more it would be a deal breaker. Actually tattoos don’t bother me near as much on men as piercings or those who put way too much time in dressing/ styling their hair to fit some alternative trend. Those men I wouldn’t be interested in at all. I consider those type of interests superficial and I would prefer a man who spends time reading the Wallstreet Journal rather than looking for a new spot to stick a needle thru on his face.

mythmom · November 7, 2012, 2:02pm

All the things I thought would be deal breakers, weren’t, though some of them should be. Dating, love, destiny – not as much under our control as we might like to think.

First husband was my perfect ego ideal – the ideal male in my opinion. We met very young and spent 13 years together before he decided I wasn’t his ideal woman.

Second husband – many compromises and traits that had been deal breakers. We have problems, but he is loyal and the father of two wonderful kids.

Yeah, I definitely don’t think tattoos would be a deal breaker for me, though neither my H nor I have them, nor do any of our friends. I think we’re just too old. OTOH, neither of my kids have them or piercings either, though some of their friends do.

My son has really “big” hair – curly and full of texture, not exactly a 'fro because the curls are too big and light brown, but along those lines. One of my nick-names for him is poodle. I’m sure some girls/folks might not like it, though some don’t like it when he gets his hair cut. His usual method is to get a fairly short cut, wait four months and repeat.

He is a grad student in art history, so no one cares. He also has a beard and went as Pan for Halloween.

Some love his look; some must thing it more appropriate for a shaggy dog.

I like him neat and trimmed and long and shaggy. No preference really.

I’d have no difficulty if he or my D got piercings or tattoos, but not their style.

I used to dislike brides with tattoos, but I’ve gotten used to it – mostly from watching Say Yes to the Dress, and now it looks fine to me. If someone wants to cover it, there are dressed that do, and theatrical make-up that will as well, but most want to show them.

Any why not?

Reassure me that all tatooed, pierced young people aren't drug using losers

CONNECT WITH US