Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?

Vaun

Hummingbird
Gold Member
Tattoos like fashion get dated quick, and when they are on someone else, dated tats look even worse. I have a northwestern indian art piece from the mid 90's (re: the anthony keidis look), that I totally hate now. The chics I see with 90's tats that have been tanned over and over are a major turn off, the tribal bands and what not. All those hipster tats that are cool now, the song birds, stars, anchors(everyone is a sailor these days), guns, text, etc, will be out of style in another 5-10 years. How will they look down the road after they have had a few tans? The only real tats that stand the test of time are akin to prison tats, and thats not a look on a chic I'll really ever be into.
 

The Lizard of Oz

Crow
Gold Member
The other day I was idly fantasizing about going down to Cali or Florida, probably FLA, and setting up my own porn production studio.

The studio would be called Inkless Productions, and the idea is that any girl that ever appears in an Inkless shoot is certified inkless from head to toe. Not even some bullshit faded flower petal on an instep. Inkless means no ink, anywhere, period.

Unfortunately, the number of younger girls (18-21) that are willing to do hardcore pornography in the US and have no ink on them is what, 5 or 6? Maybe more if you include potential Mormon sluts, but anyway you're begging.

Back to reality...
 
Bump.

Well, things have only gotten worse after 5 years it seems. I see a shocking number of girls with tats.

On the bright side, this video cracked me up. This guy is a tattoo artist and tears into stupid celebrity tats :laugh:

 

puckerman

Ostrich
It depends on where the tattoos are and what they are. That being said, I am finding a lot of them to be ridiculous and a turnoff. I suspect we will see a rebellion against this. I don't know when we will see it though.

It's especially disappointing to go to a place like Barton Springs pool. I look forward to seeing women in their bikinis. Then I see some stupid tattoo on her leg. It's always a disappointment. Some of them just look so trashy.
 

Mess O.

Kingfisher
Gold Member
I really can't fucking stand it either, and hell, I guess I can't rightly describe why - I just don't like it. Why do we like what we like, and not what we don't? Sometimes it just is. The presence of tats seem permissible only with the most gorgeous of women, since they're overall level of beauty can withstand being "weighed down" by the defacement. Just walk on.
 

Thot Leader

Kingfisher
Gold Member
They bug the shit out of me. Tatts scream "I hate my femininity" and "I don't really respect my body, don't ever have a kid with me". It's a constant reminder that the majority of women are unsuitable as wives or mothers.
 

Fender_Bender

Woodpecker
It is a very primal dislike that is hard for me to put a finger on. Perhaps it's the lack of impulse control or consideration of long term consequences, or just the herd mentality associated with tats now. There's nothing edgy about them and they just seem self indulgent. It all seems like projection of their own attraction to the tatted up badboy ("I think guys with tats are hot so guys must think girls with tats are hot")... Of course most dudes with tats nowadays are limp wristed soibois so I don't know how the attraction persists. The worst are big thigh tattoos. At a distance they look like someone smeared shit on their leg.

I don't care how artistic or well done a tattoo is. They degrade any woman at any size, type, or number. Again, I can't explain why I hate them so much. There is some chunk of my monkey brain screaming "UGLY AND TRASHY" right away. Same with stupid fuckin piercings like bovine septum rings.
 

The Lizard of Oz

Crow
Gold Member
Since this old thread was bumped, I'm going to re-post in full something I wrote in a different thread on this terrible subject.

The Lizard of Oz said:
la_mode said:
Some of the rhetoric used against tattoos/piercings in the manosphere is simply too reactionary and puritanical.

No. I know that other posters have already responded to this, but it is important to understand exactly why today's tattoo epidemic is so pernicious, and how it is related to other and seemingly disparate aspects of the culture and the time.

The tattoo epidemic in today's females is a direct expression of the ideology of radical feminism. The point of the tattoo on a girl is to disrupt and trouble the process of a man perceiving her purely as a sexual object -- the dreaded process of "objectification" which the feminists regard as the ultimate evil.

The male sexual eye seeks, more than anything else, the smooth and uninterrupted expanse of naked female skin, shaped by its curves and moistened by its juices; it seeks this perfect oasis of responsive smoothness. That is, indeed, the process of sexual objectification, and it is the most fundamental way in which a man responds to the nubile female body, especially the body of a young girl in the prime of her fertility. The male sexual eye concentrates completely on its object, and nothing in the smooth flow of skin and shape disrupts this special concentration; it is requited ever more by the smooth expanse. In a sexually avid man, there is almost no limit to the intensity which this sexual concentration can reach -- it is one of the greatest intensities known to man, as well it should be; Nature willed it so. It is a concentration that commands the man to take possession of its object and to ravish it.

The tattoo is designed to fundamentally disrupt this process by despoiling the smoothness of female flesh in a particularly evil way, by essentially turning that expanse into a piece of text -- the one thing in the world to which the human and the male eye must necessarily pay attention, and the thing that is most different from a sexual object. That is precisely what the feminists want: the flesh, the purported sexual object, speaking back, by writing back. The moment it does that, it ceases to be the perfect dumb object that it must be; a terrible dissonance is created, and the sexual concentration on the object is necessarily diminished. It can never be seen the same way.

That is also why, in my experience, a small "classy" or "artful" tat, just a little Chinese character on the instep, is just as bad as a "full sleeve" -- indeed, maybe even worse. The eye can almost find a way to blend something crude and coarse like a "sleeve" and reinterpret it as a kind of background, a garish second skin which is however not different in kind. But the isolated black tat speaks back, and there is no escaping it. Just as it can be easier to fall asleep to the loud noise of many people speaking than to the sound of one voice holding a soft but perfectly intelligible conversation. As the single voice speaking is the thing most different in kind from the oblivion of sleep -- so the text nature of that single piece of ink is the thing most different in kind from the other, sexual, oblivion. The one excludes the other.

Thus, to say that our revulsion against the tattoo epidemic in females is "reactionary and puritanical" is to have things exactly backward. It is the tattoo that is "reactionary and puritanical", literally; it is there to defeat and diminish male sexuality, which thrives and achieves its deepest realization in the process of objectification -- a process which is more fundamental to human nature and indeed, to the continuation of the species, than any other, but that the radical feminists, in their demented ideology, have decided to uproot and eliminate from life.

Now of course it is true that the luscious young sluts who are defacing themselves in this way are not doing it consciously to disturb and nullify sexual objectification -- although being instinctive creatures, I think that many sense to a greater or lesser extent that getting a tat is a particularly deep and nasty (and permanent) "fuck you" to the male sex. And of course the great and serious beauties almost never do it because they know by an instinct that is deadly serious that being the perfect sexual object is their singular privilege and calling in life, and they dare not despoil it. But the ideas of feminism are in the air and spread imperceptibly, aided and abetted by the writings and chatter of many a hag and faggot and mangina, and inexorably they preach the need for females to deface themselves so that their bodies become a "conversation" -- how dreadful -- instead of a standing reserve of meat to be arranged before the male sexual customer, which is what they are meant to be and must be. And more and more of them obey this terrible call.
 
Fender_Bender said:
I don't care how artistic or well done a tattoo is. They degrade any woman at any size, type, or number. Again, I can't explain why I hate them so much. There is some chunk of my monkey brain screaming "UGLY AND TRASHY" right away. Same with stupid fuckin piercings like bovine septum rings.

Well said. :thumbup::thumbup:

Another thing I was thinking. You never see girls (and probably guys) of established, wealthy, upper-class backgrounds get tatted up. Like you would never see a Rothschild or a Rockefeller or a Trump walking around with a sleeve tattoo :laugh:.

The breakdown of bourgeois values is one of the major reasons for the outbreak of freakish and deviant behavior.

PS, just saw Lizard's post. Superb.
 

godfather dust

Ostrich
Gold Member
TigerMandingo said:
Fender_Bender said:
I don't care how artistic or well done a tattoo is. They degrade any woman at any size, type, or number. Again, I can't explain why I hate them so much. There is some chunk of my monkey brain screaming "UGLY AND TRASHY" right away. Same with stupid fuckin piercings like bovine septum rings.

Well said. :thumbup::thumbup:

Another thing I was thinking. You never see girls (and probably guys) of established, wealthy, upper-class backgrounds get tatted up. Like you would never see a Rothschild or a Rockefeller or a Trump walking around with a sleeve tattoo :laugh:.

The breakdown of bourgeois values is one of the major reasons for the outbreak of freakish and deviant behavior.

There's plenty of rich girls with a "tasteful" wrist, ankle etc tattoo.

.0000000000001% oligarchs are not a useful group to compare to the rest of society.
 
godfather dust said:
.0000000000001% oligarchs are not a useful group to compare to the rest of society.

Perhaps not useful, but we could certainly learn a lot from them. As far as I know, they adhere to traditional norms ie. marry young, pop out lots of kids, financial stability, focus on education, hard work etc. The last thing on these peoples' minds is "lemme hit up that parlor downtown and get that dragon tat I've always wanted".
 

godfather dust

Ostrich
Gold Member
TigerMandingo said:
godfather dust said:
.0000000000001% oligarchs are not a useful group to compare to the rest of society.

Perhaps not useful, but we could certainly learn a lot from them. As far as I know, they adhere to traditional norms ie. marry young, pop out lots of kids, financial stability, focus on education, hard work etc. The last thing on these peoples' minds is "lemme hit up that parlor downtown and get that dragon tat I've always wanted".

I agree to an extent. Similar to DiCaprio giving speeches on equal pay and global warming while fucking 15 19 year olds on a jet... Do you want the bullshit he's pushing, or look more towards how he's living as an inspiration.
 

hedonist

Woodpecker
So much trash.....

And the ones with the tattoos under their tits ffs.....

Everyone trying to be rockstars these days with social media and this shit
 

King of Monkeys

Kingfisher
Grizzly said:
Days of Broken Arrows said:
Someone needs to tell these women tattoos are dreadful but it's hard to do that without coming off like your parents.

I had a conversation about this with a chick I used to work with. When she was 18, she was probably as close to a 10 as you can get without Photoshop; now, 10 years later, she's about an 8, unmarried, hitting the wall HARD and getting real desperate. Big all-natural tits that don't sag, a real genetic lotto winner, but dumber than a box of rocks. She raises more cocks than a rooster farm.

Anyways, I was telling her that I don't like tattoos on chicks because its not feminine, and when I think of people that have tattoos I think of sailors, bikers, prisoners, and so on. She starts giving me this crap about how she was thinking of getting a tattoo, they're SOOOOOO cool, and that one guy even told her that he wouldn't think of fucking a chick without tattoos.

I asked her "would you go out with a guy who wears lipstick and earrings?"

Her: "Ha ha, NOOOOOO, of course NOOOOOT!!!!..........oh..........I see what you mean." The empty look on her face was priceless.

This is a great way to get a point across to someone else. This is gold. Thanks to whoever revived this thread. I gotta remember this stuff.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
TigerMandingo said:
Fender_Bender said:
I don't care how artistic or well done a tattoo is. They degrade any woman at any size, type, or number. Again, I can't explain why I hate them so much. There is some chunk of my monkey brain screaming "UGLY AND TRASHY" right away. Same with stupid fuckin piercings like bovine septum rings.

Well said. :thumbup::thumbup:

Another thing I was thinking. You never see girls (and probably guys) of established, wealthy, upper-class backgrounds get tatted up. Like you would never see a Rothschild or a Rockefeller or a Trump walking around with a sleeve tattoo :laugh:.

The breakdown of bourgeois values is one of the major reasons for the outbreak of freakish and deviant behavior.

PS, just saw Lizard's post. Superb.

Not exactly bourgeois, it's more about breaking down the values of the aristocratic upper class. Factions of the bourgeoisie were behind the overthrow of the aristocrats. The Rothschilds and Rockefellers are not upper class, they're nouveau riche, and they're the main vectors of degeneracy. The Rockefellers promoted degenerates like Kinsey, porn and feminism, while the Rothschilds funded the destruction of the upper classes throughout Europe, especially in Russia. They've culled not only the aristocrats, but the better half of that population, nearly 65 million mostly Christians. That's why to this day the average Russian is a bit of a barbarian compared to the average western European.

They've also conspired to destroy most of the monarchies on the continent, in France, Austria-Hungary, Russia and even Turkey. The ones that remain, like the British royal family, have been coopted and infiltrated. They know that once you destroy the top of society, the rest falls apart.

People in America have been programmed to hate the upper class by Hollywood, which depicts them as uptight evil white (often blond) people. The hero in films like The Graduate, Caddyshack and so many other films is a revolutionary crypto-Jew fighting to overturn the establishment. In the Graduate, Hoffman is a neurotic loser who screws his older neighbor's wife and proceed to destroy her daughter's Goy marriage, he's portrayed as some kind of hero that we're supposed to identify with and root for...



Prior to the 1960s, most movies strived to reflect high moral values and strong traditional role models, which the social engineers have managed to successfully unravel in the last half century. Tattoos are just one of the most visible symptoms of that carefully engineered debasement of societal norms.
 

porscheguy

Ostrich
Generation Z, those born in 1995 and after are expected to be the most conservative generation since the greatest generation. They view tats as hedonistic, wasteful, and something old people get. Not saying all are like this, but their generation marks the turning point. Whereas now it seems every woman 25-45 has ink, below 25 the numbers drop off quickly. An 18/19 year old girl isn’t interested in copying her mother’s fashion accessories.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Yeah, I want to believe what my fellow Porsche poster said, but I am a bit skeptical, Gen Z is for instance even more gayed out than Millenials.

While the latest Gallup poll reported only 4.1 percent of Americans—and 7.3 percent of millennials—identify as LGBT, Barna found that 12 percent of Gen Z teens described their sexual orientation as something other than heterosexual, with 7 percent identifying as bisexual.

[img=650x290]https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/80627.png?h=559&w=1200[/img]

https://www.christianitytoday.com/n...rs-generation-z-atheist-lgbt-teens-barna.html
 

puckerman

Ostrich
I visited the Peruvian Amazon last year. I don't think I saw a single local woman with tattoos.

There apparently was a tattoo parlor in town though. It was so people could say, "I got a tattoo in Perú." I suspect most of its audience was tourists.
 
Top