Posts: 756
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2013
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
09-06-2013, 11:05 AM
Quote: (09-06-2013 01:58 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:
Quote: (09-04-2013 09:57 PM)TheBlackNarwhal Wrote:
Call me crazy, but I would turn that inside out and eat it alive.
So would I. I just wouldn't call it again after I had enjoyed 3-5 meals.
Posts: 1,723
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2010
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
09-06-2013, 02:29 PM
Quote: (09-06-2013 10:55 AM)TheBlackNarwhal Wrote:
Here's the crazy part...You're not crazy!
Quote:Kingsley Davis Wrote:
Tattoos are the most blatant class marker. Proles gonna prole.
No one is calling you crazy for wanting to bang the shit out of the girl.
I think for some guys it's a turn off for sure, but that's not the point of Kingsley Davis' post. It's a class marker. Lower class marker. Class of what? Low class character for a woman. Any woman who marks her body permanently in some way, I believe has something fundamentally wrong with herself (hates her body or something). So for marriage - no tattoos is the way to go.
If you would choose to not only fuck a girl with tattoos but marry her - by all means - go ahead.
Now - the last thing I want to say is - chill man. We use a double standard, remember?
Tattoos on guys = badass
Wald
Posts: 1,820
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation:
22
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
09-06-2013, 10:32 PM
She's not THAT dumb if she picked up on your meaning there.
Check out my occasionally updated travel thread -
The Wroclaw Gambit II: Dzięki Bogu - as I prepare to emigrate to Poland.
Posts: 2,816
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation:
55
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
09-07-2013, 06:00 PM
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.
Posts: 5,184
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation:
264
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
09-07-2013, 07:55 PM
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...
same old shit, sixes and sevens Shaft...
Posts: 2,436
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation:
14
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
06-24-2018, 06:48 PM
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.
Posts: 856
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation:
6
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
06-24-2018, 07:16 PM
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.
Posts: 775
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2018
Reputation:
11
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
06-24-2018, 08:44 PM
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.
Posts: 255
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
5
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
06-24-2018, 09:11 PM
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.
Posts: 5,184
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation:
264
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
06-24-2018, 09:23 PM
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.
Quote: (10-17-2014 09:10 PM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:
Quote: (10-17-2014 01:34 PM)la_mode Wrote:
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.
same old shit, sixes and sevens Shaft...
Posts: 310
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation:
3
Women Ruining Themselves With Tattoos -- What to Say?
06-24-2018, 10:36 PM
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