Tattoos.

[Foofoogal]

I am a Christian and have 4 tattoos.

Tons of Christians get tattoos now. It is the latest fad. The Bible speaks against it as the link states though. After reading the last few posts on this thread I cannot imagine why anyone would put themselves thru pain. Really odd to me.
I do think some discretion should be shown though as to where one puts a tattoo in case of future jobs or whatever. We never know what will happen in life. Lets suppose say in different places tattoos are common but a natural disaster occurs so a person with alot of them becomes displaced. When they show up in another town that may not be so accepting of them and try to find a job there may be a problem. Sort of reminds me of MySpace and people letting it all hang out and then it coming back and biting them in the butt.
I wonder why I tend to try to mother you all. I think mainly of the young ones on this site. I think it comes from me being in my early 20s and having to be a character witness for someone in a trial. I would of never dreamed of the questions I was put forth on my character. (How many times do you attend church, who is your pastor, etc. Scared the bajeebes out of me so much I think it set me up to always put best foot forward in case I had to be a witness again somewhere along the line.)
Now tattoos are mainstream in alot of places but not all look at them the same. I know the one on the lower back on women are called slang tramp stamps. Now I heard this from younger guys. I think this is pitiful but people do draw opinions on dress and etc. We do it here on the FL all the time. Just something to think about. [huh]

 

[Feraud]

But I go back to the point that you dont -see- the needles.....

you really dont....

.. but you feel them!

 

[Miss Neecerie]

.. but you feel them!

yes...but seeing them ...makes people think its comparable to watching yourself get a shot for tetanus or something.

Not comparable. The visual dislike of needles is not really applicable in this case. Thats all.

 

[fatwoul]

Indeed.
The next couple of months you should care for your tat.
That means avoiding scabs by cleaning the tat in lightly soaped lukewarm water and rubbing your damaged skin with a recommended moisturizer at least 4-5 times daily.
Protecting the tat from direct sunshine, no salt water bathing, etc...

I was very fortunate because who took me to get mine done has several tattoos of her own, so she could tell me what to do and when. We spent the following week by an immaculately clean lake in Ontario, so I decided to forego all the "no swimming" stuff since the water was so pure and lovely. My skin has never been in such a good condition as that week, and normally my skin is comparable to that of an alligator. With a skin condition. That's just got sunburn. and accidentally fallen in acid. OK you get the picture.

Anyway, that lake water did wonders for my tattoo. The scabs had gone before the end of the week.

 

[fatwoul]

That was the question I was hesitant to ask. Pain level involved?

Mine was comparable to being constantly scratched by a pin. It was written backwards (which a lot of tattooists do deliberately with text), so by the time he'd reached the "o" in "you" I really couldn't feel anything that bad. By the time he was doing the "T" in "This", the endorphynes were wearing off again, and he was approaching a nerve cluster on the inside of my elbow, so it stung a little more, but still nothing serious - about the same as a scratch from a bad-tempered cat.

Arms are pretty fleshy, so I'd say if you were going for the upper arm you'd be fine.

Considering something like this, on a shoulder:
(probably remove background and slogan)

Not that anybody else's opinion of your tattoo should matter in the slightest (if it does, rethink getting one), but I think that's a good choice, and a good call removing the background and slogan. Actually, with that image the slogan could perhaps remain and still look OK, although perhaps in a different font, and perhaps underneath, as if the bombshell was dropping from above.

But yeah, good choice. Do it.

 

[Woland]

Tons of Christians get tattoos now. It is the latest fad. The Bible speaks against it as the link states though. After reading the last few posts on this thread I cannot imagine why anyone would put themselves thru pain. Really odd to me.
I do think some discretion should be shown though as to where one puts a tattoo in case of future jobs or whatever. We never know what will happen in life. Lets suppose say in different places tattoos are common but a natural disaster occurs so a person with alot of them becomes displaced. When they show up in another town that may not be so accepting of them and try to find a job there may be a problem. Sort of reminds me of MySpace and people letting it all hang out and then it coming back and biting them in the butt.
I wonder why I tend to try to mother you all. I think mainly of the young ones on this site. I think it comes from me being in my early 20s and having to be a character witness for someone in a trial. I would of never dreamed of the questions I was put forth on my character. (How many times do you attend church, who is your pastor, etc. Scared the bajeebes out of me so much I think it set me up to always put best foot forward in case I had to be a witness again somewhere along the line.)
Now tattoos are mainstream in alot of places but not all look at them the same. I know the one on the lower back on women are called slang tramp stamps. Now I heard this from younger guys. I think this is pitiful but people do draw opinions on dress and etc. We do it here on the FL all the time. Just something to think about. [huh]

Dear Foofoogal

IMHO religion should have no part in how you choose to visually conduct yourself in public.
If I were to seek employment I sincerely hope that the would-be employer would accept me on my workman skills and social intelligence alone.

Do you really consider tattoos unchristian?

 

[fatwoul]

...I don't expect to get any more than that one done.

As my tattooist told me: "You'll be back."

 

[fatwoul]

...If I were to seek employment I sincerely hope that the would-be employer would accept me on my workman skills and social intelligence alone...

I agree entirely, Woland. However, I think perhaps the reason most people - myself included - choose to put our tattoos out of site for job interviews/meetings with the bank manager is because they say something about our willingness to go against the norm.

An employer might see a tattoo, and think to themselves "If this person is prepared to go against the norm with body art, what else might they do? Might they cause me trouble with my boss?"

However unfair, it might be a reasonable assumption for an employer to consider tattoos an indication of a person's compliance (or lack thereof) to societal norms.

I compare it to how I would dress for an interview. I would dress smartly, and in a way very similar to every other applicant to the job will probably dress. Conformity reassures the employer, puts them at ease, and allows them to discuss with you all the great things about yourself that lend you to the job. A big picture of Satan on your forehead would, conversely, prevent this sort of ease from existing in the interview.

Of course I'm talking about "regular" office type jobs. There are interviews where a body covered in tattoos might go down very well. If you were going for a job as a tattoo artist, for example... lol

 

[Foofoogal]

Woland. Thank you for your reply. I didn't write the Bible. IMHO they are Gods words. If you follow the link you should see these scriptures.
I think but may be mistaken that Norway is more openminded or liberal but don't know that much about Norway. I just know where I live and that in the USA some places I could easily see an employer chunking a resume in the trash depending where like I said the tattoos are or can be seen. Even if said employee has them and are hidden the overall image of the company and what is expected as dress code would come into play. I am just saying this is the reality.
Now if you work in the arts field or television or nightclub or wherever this is the norm and not the exception then no biggie.
50 years from now it may be a mute point but maybe not. History tends to repeat itself IMHO. The pendulum swings way out and then back again.
The way I see it is you had the roaring 20s which led to depression which led to war which led to 1950s and everyone running back to church. Then you had the hippie generation which led to war which led to materialist 1980s which now leads to disenchantment which will leads to swinging back.

 

[Miss Neecerie]

Biblical pronunciations against tattoos and piercings I've always been wary of. Specifically, I believe that it's missing the point somewhat to zone in on those activities being forbidden rather than the whys and wherefore of the ban. It seems to me that the believers were in actuality being instructed to avoid certain practices which at that time had strong ritual significances with pagan practices that they should not be indulging in rather than there being a specific harm in merely having a tattoo or an earring. Similar to St Paul's objections to hair braiding (which was associated with prostitutes at the time), or wmen having short hair or men long. Naturally, others are free to believe as they wish, but it does seem to me this is very much a matter of interpretation more than anything else.

Edward has it exactly right here.

The issue with saying that the Bible says they are not ok, is that if you follow that particular rule...then you need to follow -all- old testament rules. So if you eat pork, and so forth....there is already an issue there. And did not Jesus release believers from following the old testament laws? Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15 say so.

 

[zaika]

i'm a christian, i have tattoos, and i work in a government tax office. for the most part, my coworkers are conservative. however, my employer has never discriminated against anyone because of tattoos as there are and have been several employees with many and/or visible tattoos. i think the reason it is acceptable is that the employees are hard workers, smart, kind to clients, and have common sense. no one's sitting in their cubicle flipping off management (at least that they can see, lol) or smoking or shooting up or whatever tattoos are associated with or supposed to mean in society.
i agree with foofoogal in that the US is different than Europe. our social/political/religious roots are extremely puritanical. it's no one's fault today, it's just how it is. the bible does say not to mark our bodies, but we do have to understand that some of those edicts were issued for the people living in that time when marks on the body identified someone has part of a cult or tribe or whatever that was not of God. doesn't mean those of us who are Christians should throw the baby out with the bath water, of course...but tattoos mean something entirely different these days. my priest couldn't care less if i have tattoos or not and we're fairly strict and traditional. it's just...in the matter of personal salvation, tattoos do not seal the deal either way.
just my opinion FWIW [huh]

 

[deanglen]

Edward has it exactly right here.

The issue with saying that the Bible says they are not ok, is that if you follow that particular rule...then you need to follow -all- old testament rules. So if you eat pork, and so forth....there is already an issue there. And did not Jesus release believers from following the old testament laws? Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15 say so.

Yes. Ceremonial and dietary laws were fulfilled by Christ's obedience. Tattoos often had religious significance in OT times and so the prohibition against them was a way of keeping the OT believers from conforming to the body marking religions around them. Christian liberty allows sanctified reason to choose ones adornment. Modesty does not prohibit all adornment. Some tattoos might violate the standards of decency, but then the objection would be the image, not the tattooing per se.

dean

 

[zaika]

Yes. Ceremonial and dietary laws were fulfilled by Christ's obedience. Tatoos often had religious significance in OT times and so the prohibition against them was a way of keeping the OT believers from conforming to the body marking religions around them. Christian liberty allows sanctified reason to choose ones adornment. Modesty does not prohibit all adornment. Some tatoos might violate the standards of decency, but then the objection would be the image, not the tatooing per se.

dean

you said what was in my head...only most eloquently!!

 

[pretty faythe]

. After reading the last few posts on this thread I cannot imagine why anyone would put themselves thru pain.

Are your ears pierced? There was a measure of pain to this....have you seen babies toddlers get their ears pierced? Have you seen them crying? Pain is involved.

I think it comes from me being in my early 20s and having to be a character witness for someone in a trial. I would of never dreamed of the questions I was put forth on my character. (How many times do you attend church, who is your pastor, etc. Scared the bajeebes out of me so much I think it set me up to always put best foot forward in case I had to be a witness again somewhere along the line.)
Now tattoos are mainstream in alot of places but not all look at them the same. I know the one on the lower back on women are called slang tramp stamps. Now I heard this from younger guys. I think this is pitiful but people do draw opinions on dress and etc. We do it here on the FL all the time. Just something to think about. [huh]

Tattoos have nothing, I repeat nothing to do with ones character....grrrrrrr.....most people I meet have absolutely no idea I am inked...would never even imagine it. They are shocked. They'll be talking about the female teamsters who are inked and go into another topic about women being inked, and I'll have to chime in....."excuse me? What? Do you have any idea what you are talking about don't generalize. Do you even know that girl or are you just making assesments because she has sleaves and her back done? I have tats myself." They look at me are like what? Faith, you have tatoos? HUH? lol Lilttle quite you? So don't generalize about someones character. Geez. And yes, I'd geta "tramp stamp" myself after I finish getting down to my goal wieght, not to show it off though, just like I dont flaunt the tats I have now, but to cover up the veins I have on my lower back that I detest.

 

[sweetfrancaise]

I've been thinking of getting one...something to represent my writing, or love of travel or summat. I'm just worried about what it'll look like in thirty years! All of you have such fantastic ink, really unique--yes, I judge. Judge you creative, intellectual, thinking types. None of these seem impulsive, you know?

 

[Fleur De Guerre]

I'm just worried about what it'll look like in thirty years!

This is one of the things that anyone with tattoos seems to be asked by people with none, or disapproving people. The thing is, tattoos of today probably *will* look good, or pretty reasonable in 30 years, because there have been so many improvements in inks, techniques and the skill of the best artists. The old sailor you see with faded green blurs would not have been tattooed with anything approaching the skill of the artists of today, he also would have had it exposed to the elements regularly for decades.

It also depends on where you have it done. Fleshy areas may sag or stretch. You aren't going to put much weight on, say, your wrist, spine or shoulderblade though. Well probably not.

If you get an extremely intricate design with tiny lines or words, you'll get a mild degree of blurring. But you should protect your tattoos from the sun, which will prevent any damage and fading that way.

Plus there's always the argument that, well your skin isn't going to be all that when you're old anyway. What's better, saggy bingo wings, or saggy, rainbow-coloured bingo wings! Don't answer that! lol

 

[Edward]

I've been thinking of getting one...something to represent my writing, or love of travel or summat. I'm just worried about what it'll look like in thirty years!

Blurring over time is something I've thought about too - I think that can go to the issue of sizing as well (too small and it can be more likely to blur). That said.... we've all looked at the 80 year old guys with their WW" Navy tattoos that are all blurred and thought "I don't want that to happen to me", but surely tat technology has moved on since then?


One thing that surprises me, actually, is that I've not come across a resident tattoo artist on the FL... So many people in the vintage community seem to be inked that I'd have expected we'd have one or two among our number.

Anyway to get back on track if its still done the same way they put an outline on you that is not permanent. That is for them to go by and gives you the opportunity to see if you like the location and tattoo before the ink starts flying.
It really doesn't hurt, just kind of an itchy feeling.

Good to know on both counts, thanks!

As my tattooist told me: "You'll be back."

Ha ha, we'll see.... I don't want my entire body covered - I'm certainly not a back and sleeves kind of guy! Not that there's anything wrong with that, just not my bag.

I never stated how I felt about tattoos. I just think people who get them need to be informed as to why the older generation or Christians would traditionally be against them. .

Of course - I do hope my post wasn't taken as an attack on yourself - it was just my personal take on the argument on the website. Apologies if it read otherwise!

Tons of Christians get tattoos now. It is the latest fad. The Bible speaks against it as the link states though.

Well, we're not so different from regular people, I guess, in some respects. Sticking with the literalist interpretation, it always seemed to me that the reference to tattooing in that verse though was very much in the same context as the scarring your body for the dead - i.e. a prohibition on marking your body as part of an ancestor-worship ritual. Of course, plenty of people nowadays have tattoos in memory of a relative/ loved one - if we were to interpret the "tattoo ban" literally, i think this is what it would be limited to. I do agree with your point above, though, that it is always a benefit to be informed about why other people might be opposed to having a tattoo. It seems to me that this prepares one for the situation where a tattoo might cause offence and either you need to defend yourself or perhaps to avoid causing any offence by being discreet and keepnig it hidden. Either ocurse of action could be appropriate in a given circumstance. As the Book says, "there is a time and a season for everything" - there's a time to stand up and be yourself and not bow to other folks' prejudices, and a time where it is not appropriate to make it all about yourself, but to respect others' comfort zones even if they aren't for you.

But I'm babbling again.... I'm particularly fascinated by toleration and diversity within the church at present given the debates and outright rows it has caused - most particularly at present over "the gay thing" in the Anglican Communion.

I do think some discretion should be shown though as to where one puts a tattoo in case of future jobs or whatever. We never know what will happen in life. Lets suppose say in different places tattoos are common but a natural disaster occurs so a person with alot of them becomes displaced. When they show up in another town that may not be so accepting of them and try to find a job there may be a problem. Sort of reminds me of MySpace and people letting it all hang out and then it coming back and biting them in the butt.

I'd agree in general that it is important to think about future impact regarding this sort of thing. I remember reading that at least as recently as a few years ago, Disney refused to employ anyone with a tattoo at their themeparks (I preseume this meant a *visible* tattoo - visible in any of the Disney costumes, which would be more limiting for women than men, obviously). A lot of people do indeed still stereotype those with tattoos. I think this is something that will change with time, but it is still a reality at present.

Now tattoos are mainstream in alot of places but not all look at them the same. I know the one on the lower back on women are called slang tramp stamps. Now I heard this from younger guys. I think this is pitiful but people do draw opinions on dress and etc. We do it here on the FL all the time. Just something to think about. [huh]

There are an awful lot of men who have tattoos themselves who have the most awful attitudes towards women with any sort of tattoo, yes. Sad, but that's the way it is. Some tattoos are a matter of personal taste, while some are indeed ill advised, and can be ugly on a lady. none so ugly as the expressed opinions of those ladies expressed by some others!

Fascinating subject, though, and so nice to be part of a community where it can be discussed without the sort of flaming and abuse that so often accompanies internet debate.

 

[nattily_attired]

tattoos

I do not understand why someone would put a picture on their body that they would not have hanging on a wall in their home. Natty

 

[Miss Neecerie]

One thing that surprises me, actually, is that I've not come across a resident tattoo artist on the FL... So many people in the vintage community seem to be inked that I'd have expected we'd have one or two among our number.

TwoBarBreak is a tattoo artist amongst other things, and there was another at one point, whose name is escaping me at 5:30 am.....

 

[Quigley Brown]

I find them quite a turn-off.