jfdnp
Loc: Coastal Connecticut
Personally not a fan of extensively inked women but if gives them enjoyment, that's great.
DirtFarmer wrote:
Tats do not attract me, but then I'm married and don't need to be attracted. It's not my style, but I'm an old fart and the only time I ever thought about getting a tattoo was when I had to memorize Maxwell's equations.
Tattoos to me are in the same fashion class as scars. But I'm not the boss of everyone (and particularly my wife) so I just ignore those people. To each (insert appropriate pronoun here) own.
Good one about Maxwell's equations!
I've seen some beautiful ink, but I'm generally od the school that less is more.
I have two. They are crosses. One on my shoulder and one my forearm. I could care less if people don't like them. I don't do, or not do things because of someone else's opinion. I see things on people that maybe I would not do for myself, but it is a personal thing. I don't color my hair, but if someone else wants to than good for them.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Soul Dr.
Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley
My wife has a small rose tattoo on her ankle, I have a scorpion tattoo on my upper right arm. My astrological sign.
These are the only ones we have or want. It is just a way to have something unique for us.
I am fine with tattoos as long as they are not excessive. JMHO.
Will
It depends on what our brains get used to. Earrings were once outlandish (way before our era) and our garments have changed considerably over the last 100 years. Style keeps changing and I'm usually 10 to 20 years behind - my brain doesn't yet like tattoos, nose rings, non-natural hair colors, etc. Maybe in 20 years I will - we'll see.
I"f they make it past 60 the look won't be good.
I'm with you.
See a woman in a formal gown with a bunch of tats shoulder to wrist. UGH!
Men with 'sleeves' that are so busy you can't discern what they are but gobbledygook.
Nasty!
I am not opposed to tattoos—to each his own, we still have personal rights. I do think that tattoos should be meaningful, not just a pretty picture based on an impulsive whim.
The name of a lost child tattooed on his or hers parents’ body makes complete sense.
I have to agree, personally I can't imagine a tattoo, particularly a large one, that I would want to look at the rest of my life, the lifespan of my cell or computer wallpaper is often no more than mere days. I heard a good analogy some time ago dealing with beautiful women and tattoos, the tattoo was said to be akin to putting a bumper sticker on an Ferrari or Rolls Royce - you just don't do it.
I used to have to pay at the fairs to go into the tents to see the freaky people now I just go to the Mall and it's Free!
How things have changed.
Bridges wrote:
I don't mind a small tattoo on a female's ankle or shoulder but in my opinion, it has gone too far. I hate seeing a female with a really beautiful body covered neck to toe with tattoos. I like seeing the beauty of pure unadulterated acres of skin! A few years ago it seemed heavily tattooed women were usually overweight or homely looking. Now it seems I see more and more beautiful women with way too much tattooing. I guess I'm looking at this mainly from a photography standpoint. A local photographer has models take off all jewelry other than small earrings. He claims excess jewelry is distracting and takes away from the natural beauty of the model. The heavy tattooing is even worse.
I don't mind a small tattoo on a female's ankle or... (
show quote)
I have seen "art decor" of all types on a diverse group of people. Personally, I do not like tattoos because it is scarring the body. I do enjoy body paintings. Unfortunately, too often it is like seeing the spray-paints that do little to accentuate the body, or the wall. (Again, IMO.) But I have seen the impressive Art that has been done. And these were/are extremely rare. (Sidenote: Body painting done by groups are very popular with nudists.)
I have known women who bore their tattooed numbers on their arm to declare their surviving the Nazi Concentration Camps. I also have know many of them who got rid of their tattoos, deeming them to be signs of slavery. I appreciate both for their desires.
As to my "vote", I oppose the scarring of the body.
I generally find tattoos a turn-off. Perhaps it is because I remember the numbers tattooed on the arms of many family relatives and friends.
The only tattoos that I can understand are those used for medical purposes (such as where to aim the radiation device), and reconstruction of the nipple after breast surgery.
Bridges wrote:
I don't mind a small tattoo on a female's ankle or shoulder but in my opinion, it has gone too far. I hate seeing a female with a really beautiful body covered neck to toe with tattoos. I like seeing the beauty of pure unadulterated acres of skin! A few years ago it seemed heavily tattooed women were usually overweight or homely looking. Now it seems I see more and more beautiful women with way too much tattooing. I guess I'm looking at this mainly from a photography standpoint. A local photographer has models take off all jewelry other than small earrings. He claims excess jewelry is distracting and takes away from the natural beauty of the model. The heavy tattooing is even worse.
I don't mind a small tattoo on a female's ankle or... (
show quote)
And yet you are a photographer and want to cover your house's beautiful bare walls with images. Why, because you like them. Is a blank wall better?
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.