Sabtu, 19 Oktober 2013

why is it socially less acceptable for women to have a tattoo?

Q. I've been thinking about getting a tattoo for a while now and I really want something feminine and small. But I've been scared to get one, because I don't want people to suddenly not take me seriously - like a future boyfriend. I want to place it somewhere where i can hide it if I want to, because I really like the idea of having a little secret... so i guess I'm asking for your oppinion on tattoos and any experience you've had with people judging you by it and discriminating. Cheers.

A. From my point of view there is nothing wrong with tattoos. If your body is a temple you should be able to paint the walls how you want. I find women with tattoos to be pretty sexy actually but they're not for everyone.

The people that look down on women with tattoos are the ones with the deepest problems, I've known guys with tats that didn't like chicks with tats. You try to make sense out of that!

Basically I think it still goes back to a closed mindedness of women can't do certain things men can and tattoos aren't very "Lady-like". That you should be prim and proper, (Or barefoot and pregnant!LOL!) Don't let it bother you, a person is smart but people as a whole are idiots.

It's one of the oldest forms of art, and if you get one (Or have them) you should be proud.


What do you think about woman with tatoos?
Q. Is it an art? How do you explain this kind of art and whats the beauty behind it?

A. How does the gender of the person dictate whether or not a tattoo is art and/or beautiful?

I think the best way to explain my feelings about tattoos is to compare them to graffiti: small pieces are generally not great looking but they can have their moments if they're well-placed or convey a meaning perfectly. Larger pieces, although still dependent on a high level of skill in their execution, generally look better.

Of course the problem is how does one define 'art'. A lot of people would argue that something doesn't count as 'art' simply because they personally do not find it aesthetically pleasing, which is an incredibly arrogant notion. The best definition I can come up with is that art is the arrangement of any medium (with any level of control) with the intent of creating a piece which provokes an emotion. (If anyone has a better or more concise definition I'd love to hear it.)

Working from my definition one could argue that smaller pieces do not necessarily constitute art, they are, like tags in graffiti or cave paintings, a marking which conveys information. It may be aesthetically pleasing and/or stir someones emotions, but the primary intention was the documenting of information and I think intent is what art boils down to.

My wife has her sleeves done, I couldn't be happier.





Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar