| UnknownPriestKiller
|
|
|
I've often heard tattoo artists rant about people getting visible tattoos (hands, neck) the moment they hit 18 before they have other work.
Recently I discovered a rant on quite a respected figure in the tattoo community's Myspace. I say rant, it was more like pure venomous hatred.
It would seem that some find young people with visible ink, impatient and disrespectful, and they must all just think it's cool to have visible work.
I'm 23, My first tattoo was on my shoulder, then my wrists, then I got a full sleeve. Then I moved to my hands, then neck and I also have a large part of my leg tattooed.
It took me about two years to get the opportunity to get my hand tattooed by my idol, and then my neck by an artist I greatly admire, a lot of time, effort and thought was put into both of these.
Even though I'm somewhat older and do have a fair bit of coverage, I might still be classed as young and "under-tattooed" to have such visible work, and I can't help but think that's kinda crazy!
Sure I've seen some 18 year olds with kanji on their necks or poorly executed skulls on their hands, and you can almost tell they rushed into it, wanting everyone to see their new work as clearly as possible, and fine that to me is impatient and maybe even attention seeking.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that not everyone who has visible work is disrespectful to the art, some people invest a great deal of time, money and effort into getting that particular location inked with the highest standard work possible.
It's kinda funny to find prejudice within a community that tries so hard to divert it away from itself.
Thoughts? |
|
Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:00 pm |
|
| RedRox
|
|
|
UnknownPriestKiller wrote: Thoughts?
I find your choice of screen name more offensive than 18 yr olds with visible ink by their own choice and don't really know what the heck this poll and post is doing in a dietary and health forum anyway. |
|
Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:33 pm |
|
| evitoutoush
|
|
|
It seems to me that a lot of people with visible work put a lot of thought into it before hand.
There will always be exceptions, in the same way some non-tattooed people might say tattooed people are drop outs, I'm fairly sure we're not haha. |
|
Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:07 am |
|
| RedRox
|
|
|
| nice job creating a new ID to "reinforce" your initial post. so what's your purpose here really? |
|
Mon Jun 16, 2008 2:44 pm |
|
| melissa569
|
|
|
1. I'm also offended by the screen name.
2. Tattoos are the choice of the individual. And there is some great art out there. However, I think that ESPECIALLY young people need to wait on tattoos. And for everyone else--- unless you know exactly what your life-long career is going to be, it would be best to only get a tattoo that can be covered up by clothes. Because most jobs out there demand that the employees represent the company in a clean-cut and professional-looking manor. Jobs like in the medical field, lawyers, food service, real estate, contracting, politics, office jobs.... Even if you own your business, you still have to follow suit if you want to be a success (depending on what your business is). Having a tattoo that is visible even with clothing on (the face, the hands, etc.), is going to SERIOUSLY limit your career options, and cut your chances at passing an interview. Not saying you can't get tattoos, just make sure they can be hidden when necessary. |
|
Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:25 am |
|
| RedRox
|
|
|
|
|
Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:23 pm |
|