Thread: Slept through 55 tattoos???? - The plot thickens

Originally Posted by jcd

...What conclusions have you come to about this guy, looking at his tattoos? Apart from the fact he likes tattoos, what can you figure out about him that requires you to treat him differently to how you would have had he not those tattoos?

The simple and obvious conclusion that I draw from this guy's choice is that he wishes to be an outsider.

Look, we're not talking about this guys choice of shirt color. He has chosen to mark his face in a pretty permanant way for a reason. Do you honestly think for a second that he doesn't wish to make people uncomfortable? Look around you, how often do people do this? Like it or not, we all live in a culture that frowns on intentionally disfiguring ones face. Yeah, you can say all you want about tribal traditions or whatever, but we don't live there, do we?

Do you really think you can draw no conclusions about this guy? Was his decision based on nothing? Are we to believe that he is so naive that he had no clue that his appearance would be objectionable to many, if not most, people in his community? Did he just decide one day to hang that much hardware on his face and tattoo it up and not expect any sort of reaction?

Here's the trouble, You seem to think that Bruno and I and others are making judgments about this guy based on his apearance. We're not, we're judging based on the decision he made to take on that appearance. Try to understand the distinction. The things I say will make more sense if you do.

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

Well, PREjuduice means just that...PREjudge one before you haver more than their appearance to judge them on. These S&M afficianados aren't being judge for how they look. This man is. Now, his "looks" are intentional and extreme enough, in my opinion, to be an "action" or a statement. So...IF I were to judge him...I'm not sure it woiuld be a PREjudice, per se...still perhaps unfair or unfounded...

Well said and reminiscent of Ralph Waldo Emerson's famous quote,"Who you are speaks so loudly I can't hear what you're saying".

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

...his "looks" are intentional and extreme enough, in my opinion, to be an "action" or a statement. So...IF I were to judge him...I'm not sure it woiuld be a PREjudice, per se...

Yes, this is exactly what I'm trying to say. We can only properly judge a person based on their actions. The choice to look a certain is most definatly an action, so the choice to look so outside the norm is an action that can't be ignored.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

The simple and obvious conclusion that I draw from this guy's choice is that he wishes to be an outsider.

An outsider...to society? Wanting to be different from the norm doesn't necessarily mean he wants to be an outsider.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

1. Do you honestly think for a second that he doesn't wish to make people uncomfortable?
2. Look around you, how often do people do this?
3. Yeah, you can say all you want about tribal traditions or whatever, but we don't live there, do we?
4. Do you really think you can draw no conclusions about this guy?
5. Was his decision based on nothing?
6. Are we to believe that he is so naive that he had no clue that his appearance would be objectionable to many, if not most, people in his community?
7. Did he just decide one day to hang that much hardware on his face and tattoo it up and not expect any sort of reaction?

1. I have no idea, since I'm not a mind reader. I'm not going to just assume the worst of him though, even if it is easy.
2. Hardly ever. I don't understand why choosing to look different from a society norm should have negative consequences.
3. I don't understand why tribal/religious reasons are the only acceptable ones for extreme tattooage.
4. He likes tatoos. That's about it.
5. See 1.
6. He knows, of course. Whether he cares or not is unknown (unless he joins up and tells us). In any case, his possible disregard for his community's negative reaction does not justify said reaction.
7. Answer to 6. applies here.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

we're judging based on the decision he made to take on that appearance. Try to understand the distinction. The things I say will make more sense if you do.

I understand the distiction. I think it's irrelevant; the criticisms on drawing conclusions about him still apply.

Originally Posted by jockeys

his teenage daughter was old enough to have gone and gotten the tattoo WITHOUT her dad, because she has reached the age of consent, yes? It's possible I don't understand how the age of consent works in Europe, so I'm asking a question here.

Where I live, she's old enough to get tattoos, she's considered an adult, and her father wouldn't be part of the equation. Did the dad have to sign a release or something? is she not old enough to get a tattoo on her own in that jurisdiction?

You misunderstand me. I didn't say it wasn't right because she needed legal approval.

I said it wasn't right because it's his daughter. I think it's wrong for any man to let his daughter get something like a tattoo on her own (or his son for that matter) if he can avoid it. Fathers should be there for their children. And any man that buggers off for a drink while his daughter is having something injected in the skin for a length of time needs to get his priorities straight.

She can do whatever the hell she wants.

He however has no-one to blame but himself. And might need to have his relationship with his daughter checked and rechecked for himself.

Originally Posted by jcd

An outsider...to society? Wanting to be different from the norm doesn't necessarily mean he wants to be an outsider.

Actually....it does.

Standing outside of the norm makes you abNORMal.

Meaning you're an outsider at least in some aspects.

Originally Posted by LX_Emergency

Standing outside of the norm makes you abNORMal.

You would be a much smarter man than me if you could give me a universal definition of normal.

I still think there are a lot of assumptions being made about a guy none of us have actually met.

And I think he should have every right to get a tattoo on his face and be treated as any other guy. For me, at least, he does.

That pretty bad sex anaology directed to me: I'm not even sure where the prejudice in that is. I have nothing against people who do S&M - every one likes to get their rocks off and if that works for them, what ever - I would object to them doing it in the street, but I would try very hard not to judge them on that action alone.

And it would be wrong of me to if I did, the easy and obvious route would be to assume they were just crazy - but I would learn nothing from that.

The norm is a collective unofficial agreement. There is no universal definition. It differs from country to country, from table to table etc.

There's nothing wrong with being abnormal. However most people that are know it and do it on purpose. There are exceptions to this, however the tattoo with a face beneath it that we've seen in this thread isn't one of them.

Originally Posted by gregs656

You would be a much smarter man than me if you could give me a universal definition of normal.

The word 'normal' derives from 'norm'. Normal is defined solely by majority vote.
The word 'normal' is devoid of moral implication. It refers to a statistical likelihood. Being a muslim in a small southern town is probably abnormal. In Iran it would be normal. That doesn't say anything about being a muslim.

Originally Posted by gregs656

And I think he should have every right to get a tattoo on his face and be treated as any other guy. For me, at least, he does.

He has the same rights. I agree. Forcing me to have apositive opinion about him despite his choice is not one of that rights.

For example: assuming you have a partner, why did you pick him or her? You made a judgement on a number of things. One of those things was their appearance. Did you feel bad about falling in love with someone whose appearance you liked? Do you feel that it was weak and that you should have picked the ugly girl who was smitten by you, whom you met before meeting your current partner, and who might have been a better partner (rich, healthy, etc) from an objective perspective?