Tattoos were never cool.
Tattoos were never cool.
stasi wrote:
Tattoos were never cool.
And never will be.
I'm an ER doc down here in south florida, toolbag capital of the world. I see so many losers roll into the ER with one or two full sleeves of tats, always on display, as are their roided up arms. Almost invariably they don't have insurance, whatever...but when they are there because their kid or wife is sick and they would rather spend the money on those retarded tats than insurance for their family, that's when I have a problem. And call me crazy, but tats on the neck/face=UNHIREABLE (except for all the best $6/hr jobs out there). Yes, tats in our society have severely jumped the shark.
Haven't read any responses at all. But I would answer yes to the original poster's question.
Guy O'Leighken wrote:
I think no matter whether tattoos are in or out at the time, a person could briefly become the coolest person on earth by tattooing all their skin a single color. I'd suggest green.
I think the INCREDIBLE HULK is cool because he can turn his off
tbagmd wrote:
I'm an ER doc down here in south florida, toolbag capital of the world. I see so many losers roll into the ER with one or two full sleeves of tats, always on display, as are their roided up arms. Almost invariably they don't have insurance, whatever...but when they are there because their kid or wife is sick and they would rather spend the money on those retarded tats than insurance for their family, that's when I have a problem. And call me crazy, but tats on the neck/face=UNHIREABLE (except for all the best $6/hr jobs out there). Yes, tats in our society have severely jumped the shark.
It is evident that tats are how human trash identifies with one another. It is a birds of a feather thing.
Tats on women almost always make them look trashy. Tats on guys who are actually criminals, former gang members, or who grew up in the ghetto are fine by me, but if you grew up upper middle class and are highly educated, they make you look like a douche bag.
the more the better, i will retire early 'removing' them...each laser treatment costs more than the original tattoo...of course the patients that have hepatitis c from receiving the tattoo have far bigger problems than cosmetic
derm.doc wrote:
the more the better, i will retire early 'removing' them...each laser treatment costs more than the original tattoo...of course the patients that have hepatitis c from receiving the tattoo have far bigger problems than cosmetic
I feel for you Doc. No amount of money could get me to treat the iky asstarded people with tattoos. I wouldn't want to be exposed to their loser germs.
LetsHate.com wrote:
I stopped drawing on myself at 5 years old or so. I see people with tattoos as extremely insecure individuals; much like the "look at me!" crowd.
Your feelings in fact show that you're insecure
Trollist wrote:
dougfunny wrote:Ignorance abounds in this thread!
So, what kind of tattoo did you get?
I'd guess a "killer" tribal tat
OldPeopleSkin wrote:
You know what also cries for attention? Dressing in clothes you hope other people see as stylish or classy. I bet you not one of the "tattoo haters" on this thread dresses the way they do because they think its comfortable or they really truly like the clothes they buy (save a small portion of al of our wardrobes). All of our tastes have been tailored by public opinion and media. Everybody wants to purchase and wear clothes that they think will get them noticed, get them a date, make them seem in the know. I don't know, just seems like there are a lot of hypocrites on this thread. haha
Looks like any another "cool" person with a tat...so what do you have and what's the "inspirational" story behind it?
tbagmd wrote:
I'm an ER doc down here in south florida, toolbag capital of the world. I see so many losers roll into the ER with one or two full sleeves of tats, always on display, as are their roided up arms. Almost invariably they don't have insurance, whatever...but when they are there because their kid or wife is sick and they would rather spend the money on those retarded tats than insurance for their family, that's when I have a problem. And call me crazy, but tats on the neck/face=UNHIREABLE (except for all the best $6/hr jobs out there). Yes, tats in our society have severely jumped the shark.
You're a doc?...your response doesn't sound like one of an educated man- and no I'm not a fan of tattoos but surely respect a person's choice to have one
asldfkh;klsa wrote:
Tats on women almost always make them look trashy. Tats on guys who are actually criminals, former gang members, or who grew up in the ghetto are fine by me, but if you grew up upper middle class and are highly educated, they make you look like a douche bag.
You could have just said that you feel that only people like yourself are cool...boy are you a winner
Investing in the growing tattoo removal business is going to be huge over the next few years.
The dirty dirty mirror wrote:
derm.doc wrote:the more the better, i will retire early 'removing' them...each laser treatment costs more than the original tattoo...of course the patients that have hepatitis c from receiving the tattoo have far bigger problems than cosmetic
I feel for you Doc. No amount of money could get me to treat the iky asstarded people with tattoos. I wouldn't want to be exposed to their loser germs.
Yeah I bet this guy is HIV+ by now
You apparently have little knowledge of HIV transmission and/or universal precautions.
Anyway, techs do the actual scutwork and it is cash only. I see them for the initial visit and after x # of treatments.
I am expanding and opening an additional treatment center.
Far more lucrative than botox 'parties' and I have more time to get in the miles and spend with family.
derm.doc wrote:
You apparently have little knowledge of HIV transmission and/or universal precautions.
Anyway, techs do the actual scutwork and it is cash only. I see them for the initial visit and after x # of treatments.
I am expanding and opening an additional treatment center.
Far more lucrative than botox 'parties' and I have more time to get in the miles and spend with family.
Good for you Doc. Stick it to those morons. Their stupidity equals your wealth! I like it!!
On a positive note; I am all for the freedom of people getting tattoos. It makes it a an easy way to spot the idiots in our society without ever actually having to deal with them. Tattoos = go away dumb dumb.
I was until recently the senior writer and chief copy editor for a mass-consumer tatt/culture mag here in Australia. I myself do not have a single one, even though I write about them all the time and socialise with mostly tattooed people. Why? 90 per cent of people with tattoos are losers, get it for the reasons a loser would get one and choose a lame design off a grubby wall for some monkey with a needle to copy by rote... poorly. That seems to fulfil all the requirements for a stupid thing a retard would get into, and that's before we ever get to the whole 'rest of your shelf-packing life' thing.
Anticipated rebuttals dealt with here:
1) I can get them removed, either now or in the future once people without tattoos figure it out.
No, you can't and no, you won't. There is a certain ink called Infinitink that does the job but yeah. It has microballs of organic dye and f*ck knows what. Nothing else on the horizon. Trust me on this.
2) Tattoos are intensely individual expressions of personal significance.
But your isn't. Yours is some tribal piece of crap or a whimsical hipster pastel elephant or a biohazard symbol or a tiger or a carp you insist on calling a 'koi' like you have a clue. So's his. And him. That guy spent $8000 and went to Japan to get it done in some alleyway with a sliver of bamboo. He's the real deal. The rest of you are posers. Also, if you want to express yourself, there's always music, art, poetry... and a whole bunch of other things that take years of practice. Best get some tatt instead. Few hours and you're done. Youre cooler than Joe the Camel, guy.
3) Girls/guys dig them.
For now. I give it ten years before a tattoo becomes a very handy measuring stick to how much of an attention-seeking moron someone was in their 20s. IF they have tatts and also have no prospects and some hard-luck tale in their 40s, my conclusion will likely be the time I spent writing and furthering my career, they spent attending gigs and hanging in pubs and showing off their tatts. So, back of the line for you, and thanks for making picking you so much the easier.
4) I can do what I want so screw you and your judgement.
Sure. Fair enough. If you could roll down that sleeve that'd be awesome though, and can the attitude as well, if you have time to get to it. You don't see me getting about with short shorts and a tanktop showing as much as I can of my gleaming, unsullied, untatted golden hide, so just scurry off and accept if nobody ever saw your tatts you'd never have gotten one. There's a pretty big conclusion waiting for you at the end of that thought process so follow the rabbit and have fun with that.
Quill wrote:
I was until recently the senior writer and chief copy editor for a mass-consumer tatt/culture mag here in Australia. I myself do not have a single one, even though I write about them all the time and socialise with mostly tattooed people. Why? 90 per cent of people with tattoos are losers, get it for the reasons a loser would get one and choose a lame design off a grubby wall for some monkey with a needle to copy by rote... poorly. That seems to fulfil all the requirements for a stupid thing a retard would get into, and that's before we ever get to the whole 'rest of your shelf-packing life' thing.
Anticipated rebuttals dealt with here:
1) I can get them removed, either now or in the future once people without tattoos figure it out.
No, you can't and no, you won't. There is a certain ink called Infinitink that does the job but yeah. It has microballs of organic dye and f*ck knows what. Nothing else on the horizon. Trust me on this.
2) Tattoos are intensely individual expressions of personal significance.
But your isn't. Yours is some tribal piece of crap or a whimsical hipster pastel elephant or a biohazard symbol or a tiger or a carp you insist on calling a 'koi' like you have a clue. So's his. And him. That guy spent $8000 and went to Japan to get it done in some alleyway with a sliver of bamboo. He's the real deal. The rest of you are posers. Also, if you want to express yourself, there's always music, art, poetry... and a whole bunch of other things that take years of practice. Best get some tatt instead. Few hours and you're done. Youre cooler than Joe the Camel, guy.
3) Girls/guys dig them.
For now. I give it ten years before a tattoo becomes a very handy measuring stick to how much of an attention-seeking moron someone was in their 20s. IF they have tatts and also have no prospects and some hard-luck tale in their 40s, my conclusion will likely be the time I spent writing and furthering my career, they spent attending gigs and hanging in pubs and showing off their tatts. So, back of the line for you, and thanks for making picking you so much the easier.
4) I can do what I want so screw you and your judgement.
Sure. Fair enough. If you could roll down that sleeve that'd be awesome though, and can the attitude as well, if you have time to get to it. You don't see me getting about with short shorts and a tanktop showing as much as I can of my gleaming, unsullied, untatted golden hide, so just scurry off and accept if nobody ever saw your tatts you'd never have gotten one. There's a pretty big conclusion waiting for you at the end of that thought process so follow the rabbit and have fun with that.
Well written mate. Unfortunately only people with brains will understand you. Fvcktards with tattoos won't have a clue.