Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST,# Date: 25 Aug 14 - 05:03 AM But grandma, . . . |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Musket Date: 25 Aug 14 - 03:49 AM Nigel. The NHS issue is due to licensing of tattoo parlours not being through health based regulators but through environmental health, which is more premises based rather than client safety through the process. I was involved a few years ago in the discussions regarding whether to bring them under what would now be CQC registration. It was decided not to, but the then Health Protection Agency decided that instead, they had to be classes as a potential blood borne virus risk. To be fair to the industry, most high street ones use single use needles and latex gloves, but the needlestick risk for the artist remains high. The risks for the customer are rather low though. NHS Blood have a number of risks they reject on, and although we never went to malarial areas, the only times Mrs Musket and I couldn't give blood was within six months of being in Thailand and South Africa. Of course, not all tattoos are sold in licenced premises.... |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: open mike Date: 24 Aug 14 - 02:41 PM Both of my daughters are pregnant and we recently held a double baby shower where they both got henna designs on their bellies .. and several others got designs on their hands arms and backs. henna tattoo artist who decorates pregnant bellies This artist will only do belly designs on pregnant mammas. Mine is still on my arm, but fading a bit after a couple of weeks. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Nigel Parsons Date: 24 Aug 14 - 12:50 PM Interesting that the NHS (Britain) don't want you to give a blood donation if: You've had a tattoo, semi-permanent make up or any cosmetic treatment that involves skin piercing in the last 4 months. Here |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST,# Date: 24 Aug 14 - 11:18 AM It's vibrant anyway. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Jack Blandiver Date: 24 Aug 14 - 05:00 AM Thanks to this thread I've spent the last half hour looking through sites like THIS whilst pondering how they might relate to emergent concepts of Folk Art. I think we're in very dark & dangerous territory here - I heard one young chap once challenge his friend thus : "Are you reading my mum's tattoos?", which certainly put a different spin on the phenomenon. The ephemeral nature of the fashion for such things stands in stark contrast to the permanence (and general ghastliness) of the things themselves. Roll on, roll on ye autumn winds - which will have them covered up nice, at least in public... As for ACAB, in my young day this became symbolised by four dots on the knuckles of (I think) the left hand - easier to self inflict during double French with a safety pin and a bottle of Quink. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST, topsie Date: 24 Aug 14 - 03:36 AM "so if you want a tattoo, it is entirely your choice" While this is true, I have heard non-tattooed people being criticised by their tattooed companions for not going along with the current trend. I fear that some may give in to the pressure from others, and get a tattoo in order to be accepted, and may well regret it later. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Musket Date: 24 Aug 14 - 03:01 AM She didn't perchance have HATE and ACAB (all coppers are bastards) tattooed on her knuckles Michael? Just mentioned it because Gibb Sahib would like to meet her. You randy philanthropist you.... |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: MGM·Lion Date: 24 Aug 14 - 02:54 AM One, or a few, tasteful* tattoo(s) can be quite attractive. I have always quite enjoyed occasionally finding a pretty flower or a ❤ or ❧ or ❦ or some such in an unexpected place on the body of a woman with whom I have succeeded in achieving that delightful degree of intimacy. OTOH I personally find this fashion for footballers making one entire arm a display of some sort of doubtless meaningfully symbolic statement a rebarbatively filthy-looking turn-off; but if that's what they want to do with themselves, and their wives don't mind too much [or even perhaps find it attractive], then I suppose it's none of my put-in anyhow. ≈M≈ *& there's a cop-out of a word, eh? |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: DMcG Date: 24 Aug 14 - 02:33 AM The original question was not, I think, questioning whether a person had a right to have a tattoo or not. Most people, and I am certainly one, would accept the "my body is my own" argument, so if you want a tattoo, it is entirely your choice. But the question was asking how a viewer feels. Not the tattooed person. Personally, I do not usually find them attractive. But that is my personal preference, which always favours the natural over the artificial. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Bev and Jerry Date: 23 Aug 14 - 05:40 PM At the risk of causing this thread to move above the line again, we're reminded of Peter Alsop's song "My Body" whose chorus is: My body's nobody's body but mine You run your own body, let me run mine! Bev and Jerry |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Lighter Date: 23 Aug 14 - 02:21 PM This caught my notice only because I'd just read Bubblyrat's description of his tattooed acquaintance. In his WW1 diary-memoir, "There and Back" (1935) R. E. Lording mentioned a fellow Australian who had "a hunt scene tattooed on his back, but as the fox is disappearing into his hole you can only see the tail." The year was 1915. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Lighter Date: 10 Aug 14 - 12:13 PM I think I did see Beckham in a US ad once. But he was already a recognized celebrity. Of course, there was the iconic "Marlboro man" in the '50s, a cowboy with a discreet back-of-the-hand tattoo of something or other. But that was a unique attempt to show just how tough this imaginary smokin' cowpuncher really was, even though he was smokin' them (formerly sissy) *filtered* cigs. At least one of the models later died of smoking-related illnesses, however. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Roger the Skiffler Date: 10 Aug 14 - 11:43 AM Lighter, UK ad agencies don't seem to have a problem with this. David Beckham, for one, is all over our tv screens in ad breaks. RtS |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST Date: 10 Aug 14 - 11:27 AM So how would prehistoric tribal mankind accidently discover the tattooing process and immediatley think it kinda cool and rock 'n' roll ??? |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Lighter Date: 10 Aug 14 - 10:20 AM Haven't checked lately, but my decided impression is that *no* serious US TV commercials for mainstream products feature an obviously tattooed model, male or female. Since the ad-makers are finely attuned to what will impress or turn off consumers, this tells me that tattoos are still generally disdained. For now. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Backwoodsman Date: 10 Aug 14 - 09:50 AM LOL! |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Musket Date: 10 Aug 14 - 09:00 AM I don't recall her being a skinhead (though to be fair, I can't really recall anything physical other than the tattoos,) but the role wasn't for her. She could rattle on about force, g, frequency, bracing and other aspects of vibro engineering all day but I almost guarantee a factory manager wouldn't invest a couple of hundred grand on our machinery on her technical advice, however good it was. If she was hot, I wouldn't know. I was wanting to employ someone , not fuck them. |
Subject: RE: BS: Hot Tattooed Women From: Gibb Sahib Date: 10 Aug 14 - 07:32 AM Musket, do you have the phone number for the skinhead girl you almost hired, and how old is she? She sounds hot. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Backwoodsman Date: 10 Aug 14 - 07:06 AM When I was a wage-slave and managing people, I always tried very hard not to 'judge the book by its cover', and I wouldn't have been put off employing office-bound staff by their having proper, professionally-done, tasteful tattoos in appropriate places. However, home-made dots and acronyms on knuckles, spiders' webs on necks, stick-men on hands etc., are taboo, AFAIC, and would definitely have been a major black mark against an applicant who displayed them. I didn't do the setting-on of customer-facing staff, but I guess I would have had to make a judgement in that kind of circumstance, and I suspect my judgment would pretty much align with Musket's. Fortunately, I'm retired now, so it ain't gonna happen! :-) My wife and I both have tattoos, and they were done by a very skilled, highly professional artist, but they are in easily-covered locations, and no-one sees them unless we choose to show them. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Musket Date: 10 Aug 14 - 04:50 AM I once interviewed a woman for a job that included seeing customers. She was well qualified, articulate etc. I could just about put up with the swallow on her neck, a bit of a talking point maybe, customers remember her rather than when they visit the factory of a competitor. After all, when the CEO had an earring.... But no. ACAB on one set of knuckles and HATE on the other, both rather homemade too. I felt sorry for her and it was obviously an earlier her, but not for this role sadly. Regarding the earlier reference to tramp stamp. I thought it denoted where to rest my pint pot... |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Tattie Bogle Date: 09 Aug 14 - 08:25 PM As a medical student in the 60s we were categorically and melodramatically told by the politically-insensitive VD consultant (as was his title then) - "Aha, the tattooed lady, check her WR (test for syphilis) - nearly all tattooed ladies are prostitutes"! Well, maybe times have changed a bit, but there was a time when getting tattooed also ran the risk of acquiring Hepatitis B or C or HIV from use of unsterile equipment. Hopefully tattooists have cleaned up their act since then in order to stay in business. And as any plastic surgeon knows there are people queuing up to get no-longer-loved tattoos removed by laser: I think that in most if not all UK health authority areas this is no longer entertained as something to be done on taxpayers' money (i.e. NHS-funded). So please do think long and very hard before getting a tattoo in the first place. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 09 Aug 14 - 08:01 PM Make your reservations now for the 2015 Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo (August). |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST,# Date: 09 Aug 14 - 07:36 PM Second that. Good though. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Bill D Date: 09 Aug 14 - 05:19 PM *groan* |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Backwoodsman Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:31 PM When I went bald I had rabbits tattooed on my head. From a distance they look like hares. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Ebbie Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:11 PM That "most tattooed woman" can't be serious- she could have shaved her head to create another canvas. It is not as though she couldn't have tattooed hair onto it, for cripes sake. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Bill D Date: 09 Aug 14 - 12:49 PM most tattooed woman at least she had a 'reason' of sorts. the ultimate body modification (piercings) don't look if these things make you queasy. There are extremes in everything... I find many 'decorations' to be distracting from focusing on the person and facial characteristics that humans have always used to try to relate to one another. Metal rings or studs in the lips, nose & tongue always seem to be just advertising a personality type to others, while pretty & mostly discreet tattoos can be no more distracting than odd hair styles or clothing....except they can't be easily altered. Body adornment & modification has a long & complex history, some of which I can understand, and some I can't..... perhaps I should wonder why I never had the urge, and even dress blandly. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Amergin Date: 09 Aug 14 - 10:20 AM I think they're sexy as hell, especially if they are well executed. The thing about tattoos is that you get exactly what you pay for. The more you pay, chances are the better the tattoo. Also, let the artist be an artist....tell them what you want, but let them add their own flair....they like it better and are more liable to do better work. If you keep getting them, build a relationship with the artist, instead of going to different shops (unless of course the artist sucks). My first was a homemade tattoo, done with a guitar string dipped in ink. It has since been covered with a harp on the back of my right hand. I have, currently, 11 others on various parts of my body. More will come, I'm sure. Each tattoo means something to me, some are spiritual in nature, some mean loved ones, some stand for my own struggles, but they are all mine, no one else's. I love to see them on women....they give me something more to admire, upon an already beautiful canvas. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Backwoodsman Date: 09 Aug 14 - 06:43 AM "Absolutely cannot abide them. Not to put too fine a point on it, they give me the creeps. I'll be glad when the tattooing craze is over" I have exactly the same feelings about those f***ing ukuleles that infest and ruin every musical event nowadays. Ukulele? Should be pukelele AFAIC! |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST,Fred McCormick Date: 09 Aug 14 - 05:26 AM Absolutely cannot abide them. Not to put too fine a point on it, they give me the creeps. I'll be glad when the tattooing craze is over, but heaven knows what will replace it. The Elsa Lanchester look perhaps? |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Sandra in Sydney Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:37 AM GUEST 08 Aug 14 - 01:49 PM Then there are the tattoos on legs and ankles that from only a few yards away look like bruises and acute varicose veins. Late last century/early this one a male friend bought a sheet of small "temporary tattoos" & wore a postage-sized spider web on his cheek & it looked just like a bruise. I hadn't thought of it for years! He didn't get a permanent tat, probably cos he didn't get a good reaction to the experiment. I remember an earlier thread about tattoos where a Catter referred to a female relative's small Blue Bird on her stomach. Pregnancies & weight gain made the bird into a giant. I've also seen a young friend rubbing soothing ointment into her new tattoo, as it was hurting badly. She wasn't regretting getting it done, but didn't like the pain. No pain, no gain? sandra |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST,# Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:36 AM And you look great, too! |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Backwoodsman Date: 09 Aug 14 - 03:03 AM What a bunch of boring, old-fashioned farts. I learned long ago the value of a decent hair-cut, and I don't like to see ancient male hippies with a bald patch and wispy long yellowed-grey hair tied in a dopey pony-tail, but if that's what they want, and they're happy to look like dirty old tramps, that's fine by me - let them carry on, and the best of luck. The French have a term for it don't they? "Laissez-faire"? I think it's "Live and let live" in English. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: JennieG Date: 08 Aug 14 - 06:20 PM It does absolutely nothing for me, but to each his own. It took me until I was 30YO and had already given birth to pluck up courage to have one hole pierced in each ear lobe, so it will take much longer again until I get a tat. An older woman with sagging tats (you may substitute another vowel if you wish) is not a pretty sight. Here are some tats which may not have gone according to their owner's plan. A misspelled tat is with you for a long time; a tribute to a departed loved one loses a little of its meaning when "sleeping with the angels" becomes "sleeping with the angles" as I have seen on this site. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Barb'ry Date: 08 Aug 14 - 05:12 PM Nobody's business but their own. I saw a poster on a tattoo shop window saying, 'the only difference between someone who isn't tattooed and us is that we don't care if you have a tattoo' but put better than that! |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: olddude Date: 08 Aug 14 - 04:33 PM Well my 30 year old daughter has a beautiful flower one between her shoulders. I said if you love the artwork so much that you want to wear it forever. Then why is in a place you can't see. I don't think they make anyone look better. I have seen some on young girls arms that look nice now but if they gain weight the butterflies will look like Buzzards. However the ones that look nice now, the girl would look nicer without it. But to each there own |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Gibb Sahib Date: 08 Aug 14 - 04:21 PM I wonder: Does anyone have a good recipe for milquetoast made with Wonder bread? I need to bland up my life a bit more, and I heard Mudcat was a good community to start with. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 08 Aug 14 - 03:43 PM NFL setting a bad example for young people allowing players to have visible tattoos. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: michaelr Date: 08 Aug 14 - 03:41 PM When I was growing up, only sailors and criminals had tattoos. Watching tattooed footballers on TV, they look like they have dirty arms. It's telling that the lower-back tattoo on a female is known as the "tramp stamp." |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST Date: 08 Aug 14 - 03:34 PM Prison tattoos. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Bill D Date: 08 Aug 14 - 02:40 PM "A businesslike hooker named Gail Was tattooed with her prices for tail. And on her behind, For the sake of the blind, A duplicate version in Braille" -------------------------- tattoos, like jewelry, clothing, hair styles, makeup and various other things, are individualistic, personal and vary in taste and cleverness. I have seen some tattoos that were elegant... and some that were beyond ghastly. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST Date: 08 Aug 14 - 02:26 PM if, like anything else, it's done artfully and tastefully, a tattoo is an enhancement to what i consider a "blank canvas." a lot of tattoos resemble amateur attempts and look rather cheap and trashy, and i've never understood the desire to permanently advertise someone else's product for free (thinking harley-davidson here).... some - even though they're done well - are rather common (butterflies) and look nice but don't seem to add anything to the human body in the way of individuality or uniqueness, so i don't see the point except to say "i have a tattoo" (which may just be the point the individual tattoo-ee wanted to make?...or that she likes butterflies) the rise in women getting tattoos is a result of a subtle marketing ploy designed to broaden the consumer base, much like the marketing genius who realized that if he could get women interested in harley-davidson motorcycles he automatically increased the number of potential customers by 100%. then we started seeing more women in HD's commercials and advertisements, and it seems to have worked. a young, dark-complected lady friend recently got a big tattoo of a peacock with the concomitant colors draped from the outside of her left thigh across the front of her leg above the knee, with tail feathers trailing down the inside of her calf. the colors were especially vivid and striking against the backdrop of her skin, and obviously the skill it took to accomplish such a piece can be appreciated. aside from that, it gives me an excuse to admire the shapeliness of her leg without seeming too much of a perv. if i were to get a tattoo, it would have to be one of very high quality and uniqueness to show my individuality and appreciation of well-crafted body art. so far i haven't seen or thought of anything i would want to wear on my body permanently for the rest of my days. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: bubblyrat Date: 08 Aug 14 - 02:08 PM The best I ever saw (in the Royal Navy,of course ) consisted of two red horned and fork-tailed "devils" , one on each buttock,industriously shovelling coal up the subject's anus,from which copious flames and smoke billowed forth. I have suggested this to my "other half", but sadly .......... |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Sean Belt Date: 08 Aug 14 - 02:01 PM Like anything else, if a tattoo is well thought out and skillfully executed, then why not have it? If it is cheaply done and it's only meaning is "I got rillee drunk that night", then it was probably a mistake. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST Date: 08 Aug 14 - 01:49 PM Then there are the tattoos on legs and ankles that from only a few yards away look like bruises and acute varicose veins. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Backwoodsman Date: 08 Aug 14 - 01:39 PM Individual choice. Nobody' business but your own. If you like them and want them, get them. If you don't like them and don't want them, don't get them - but mind your own bloody business where others' tattoos are concerned, they're nothing to do with you. IMHO. |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: GUEST Date: 08 Aug 14 - 12:44 PM Rawtenstall Annual Fair had a sad warning on the subject - not least the admonition not to go down the mine... |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 08 Aug 14 - 12:36 PM Ugh! Same for tattoos on men |
Subject: RE: BS: Tattoos on Women From: meself Date: 08 Aug 14 - 12:07 PM Call me old-fashioned, but ... okay, you know the rest. However, I'm at an age at which I can't expect any twenty-year-old male or female to give two hoots what I think about anything, let alone their attractiveness or lack thereof, so .... |