Tattoos

pic related should be how a white person turns his/her body into a piece of art.

Tattoos?
only ones I can accept is the name of your child, w/an angel or something, if he/she died tragically (grief process, etc) or if you are part of a war-time brotherhood (not for Israel) and you and the rest of the survivors decide to have that something to remember those who didn't make it.

other than that..?

Just degeneracy.
leave it to spear-chuckers who need it to signal their virtue like the primitives they are.

It's degenerate and an abomination to the white skin. People should have paler skin, not darker. Tanning is degenerate as well.

okay, okay…

I'm posting it.

...

this.

Tatooed user, agreed though I value each slab of marble a project on each man and I deemed my own worthy of inscription - simple as that.

You are both the marble and the sculptor, so you decide. Just no dyke haircuts.

There is a correllation between low social class and tattoos. And of course between hipster nu-males and strong womyn and tattoos.

It's a great warning sign.

Whatever might have been my opinion on tattoos has been rendered irrelevant by the massive prevalence of them amongst normalfags.

Being tattooed is now the norm and in the same way I don’t want to wear the exact same pair of shoes or coat as everyone else I to don’t want to be covered in tattoos like everyone else.

Not being tattooed is now the rarity and therefore holds equity.

Young women who are covered head to toe in random markings WILL regret it. The fact that they have wholesale made this decision without being told to think twice is quite indicative of the level at which society as fallen.

Tattoos can therefore perhaps be seen as one of visual representations of the godless degeneracy that stalks us.

Once you've tattooed yourself, you have already given up crafting yourself into a healthy archetype.

You have given that goal up for a temporary whim.

A few tattoos that are there to tell to mark something important and has a story coming with it are alright but just getting one because it look nice is retarded.

My mother has you only live once tattooed on her arm and she is only moderately degenerate.

English isn't our first language and she doesn't know about the "Yolo" mentality so she only got it because it sounds cool.

I could have prevented it but I didn't

No, i don't want people to judge me out of my appearance. Thats too simply, I want to be judged by my ideas, my intellectual work, my music, my literature, my logic, my mathematics, my science.

I'm confident that this degenerate tattoo culture stems from the leftists trying to integrate the criminals into society for the sake of solidarity. I'm not that soft; for me criminals are scum and criminals die. I don't care how poor they were or how exposed they were in life , if they are criminals they die.

No, if you take tattoos, you're a freak, not far from the freaks that make holes on their cheeks and do body modifications. The true Superhuman comes from supreme physique, supreme intelligence and supreme wisdom and this shortcut of getting social validation by getting blood-cancer inducing heavy metals into your epidermis via "tattooos" makes me want to vomit out of sheer disgust.

Good point though.

I hate tattoos, especially the ones copying the tribal polynesian niggers. If I see a white person with one I instantly hate them.

I'd say that too many tattoos are pretty low on the list of problems we have so I dont know why I hate them so much, I hate them way more than I hate homosexuals.

Theyre just ugly and i guess they reveal your inner normie nature and I just fucking hate them.

I don't really care about tattoos, as long as they are relatively hidden and not an eyesore; it's disgusting to see an entire arm tattooed up.

For me, my biggest negatives come in the analysis of why people get them. It seems to me that many use them as a form of self medication, and a badge of the acceptance of dysfunction (which is often childhood related).

My previous friend whom I no longer in contact with, quit university after one semester. He essentially had a mental breakdown, and ended up getting numerous tattoos including a pair of dice on his neck. He can't provide a solid reason for it.

You can see this behaviour with many people today, I suppose you could label it as a form of self harm in some aspects.

There is a difference between the current degenerate tattoo culture and tattoo`s which are rooted in one`s culture.

You will NEVER be judged by those criteria. People form opinions of one another within seconds of meeting and mostly around outwards appearance. Posture, facial expression and of course clothing.

My brother's french mongrel gf got a tattoo of Woody Allen's face on her fat fucking thigh.

There's nothing degenerate with tattoos, although some can look pretty trashy. Get one or 10 if you really want, but remember that being totally free of tattoos is a sign of virtue nowadays.

As I said, degenerates can be forgiven for their degenerate tattoos if they show remorse and stop promoting degeneracy. If the promotion stops, the degeneracy stops. As a matter of fact, I don't even mind them showing it off on the beach, as long as they don't actively encourage it consciously. I don't want them to be depressed prisonerss in their body if their hearts and minds are in the right place. My love for my people is immortal, and I will give the love, even to these degenerates as long as they are willing to receive that love.

It's just as with faggots, you can tolerate them for the sake of personal friendship, but letting them promote their mindvirus is unacceptable. I love my people, and I will not let the freaks ruin what my ancestors spilled their life for these past 1000 years. I don't know how you americans think, but if someone attacks my roots, the country will eat them, no questions asked. I know alot of these libertarians say "Live and let live" . But what does that mean? That they don't love my people? That they don't love the best interest of the nation? If they don't love my people , why should I let them live? Who are they ? Do they think they are more important than my nation? When i reason about these freaks that promote ideals, I want to tolerate as much as possible, but once they turn against my ancestral home, I only see natural selection, nothing else.

Is pretty much all I gain from seeing someone with tattoos.
Annoying attentionwhoring but at least its easier to not look instead of not listen.
And extreme examples at least net you a warning about girls you REALLY do not want to wake up besides in the morning.

How do you remember Socrates? By his beard?
How do you remember Nikola Tesla? By his ties?
How about Machiavelli? Raphael, Davinci? Do you remember them by the way they wore their clothes and how cool hats they wore? No you don't because great men are not immortalized by these petty infantile 1-day work symbols of craft.

They are remembered from their hard labor, their genius creative minds and ideas. This entire concept of letting someone imprint their pig-marking into your skin and you taking pride from it is in my opinion the lowest form of social expression, it is the epitome of desperation for self-realization, the ultimate intellectual sacrifice and symbol of national disconnection. Tattoo shops should be set on fire with the "artists" in them.

Is you saying that the jews
wuz

Tattoos are fine if you're a drunkard, whore or convicted criminal. Just don't expect respect for it.

Remembering and judging somebody are two different things.

And, well, meeting a modern-day Diogenes would probably cause a negative reaction in most people too.

Diogenes was a man without a sense of proportions, he did did just what these tattooed freaks are doing but in the opposite direction. He depraved himself of everything decent just to get social validation and attention. He reminds me of those politicians that speak in a deliberately monotone voice, just so people will notice it in contrast to all those dramatic orators.

No, freaks are freaks, And usually it doesn't take much time or effort to notice it. And by the way, Diogenes never did any irreversible transformations on his body either and I bet he would be disgusted by the concept of modern tattoos as well.

2 fucking years? Lazy prick.

That tattoo reminds me….

I know this guy who has a pepe "feels good man/feels bad man" mug (the different pepes on different sides of the cup). He's a gigantic cuck. I love it that this cup, which I'm sure he believes once made him hip, now features Trump's RWDS's mascot.

I keep all my tattoos in spots where they can be hidden by normal clothing. No forearms, neck, knuckles, face. Yakuza style.

I worked at a tattoo shop as a piercer for a year. Tattoo artists are universally degenerate. They are all complete drama queens and usually have drug problems. Fuck that industry. The guy I used to work for and his wife recently converted to Islam and I'm honestly not even surprised.

If you can't squeeze the two minutes of thought required to appraise whether or not ingraining some inane image on your skin for the rest of your life is a good idea or not, you might be a bonehead my man.

Pretty much because of notable artwork featuring them.
If there were no busts of Socrates, no photographs of Tesla, they would rarely be mentioned outside of academic circles.
The wider population NEEDS a picture, we are visual creatures and these WISE men knew this. Hence the historical importance of statues, busts, paintings and photographs, the wise man knows that to be kept alive in the minds of future generations, a visual anchor is needed.
You can call this anti-intellectual all you like, but the intellectual works with human nature, not against it.

The most simplest way I can explain is this.

The human body is a work of art. Would you put graffiti on art? No, you wouldn't.

You don't need to hide it. Just make sure people have the right idea of whats right and wrong when they communicate with you directly. We all do mistakes, and its very easy to tattoo the entire body like that within a couple of days of work , and regret it for the rest of life.

We should not condemn people for the mistakes in their lives,but we should promote the right ideas for growth. We should be forgiving, but not insane. And to be honest, I think we will meet more youngsters with "all body tattoos" like that, that will join the redpilled side of seeing the world, and we need to be prepared to embrace them, if they decide to oppose degeneracy for the people.

This is an ideological war and a race war, we will not alienate the aryan individuals who are prepared to fight for their kin, despite their previous wrong decisions of what they did with their own bodies.

Are you crazy? Tesla got an entire SI unit named after him, literally everytime a magnet is mentioned, its strength is measured in Tesla. Please don't be naive.

Nonsense, there are tons of intellectual contributions that have been made by anonymous scientists, that still live on today and are used on many fields: Such as the Student-distribution for instance.

No, what the world needs is strong genes, strong discipline and supreme order: That is the key towards a predictable, happy and productive life. All this shallow nonsense of "how things look like on the surface" is a delusion on a mass scale, stemming primarily from peoples obsession of instant gratification and pathological incapability of delaying anything resembling of gratification.

Tattoos are for criminals, niggers, wiggers, feminists, and all around degenerates.

Want to make your body your canvas? Exercise and make your body as beautiful as it was meant to be.

This tbh fam. Your body is your temple, don't fill it with graffiti.

I kinda like some tattoos like religious ones in moderation I suppose, but most peoples tattoos today are just shitty meaningless graffiti or its some kind of self indulgent "meaningful" image that tells their "story" or some shit. I also don't think women should ever get tattooed because they just end up looking like disgusting tramps.

Tattoo artists paint people with regrets. If you get a tattoo, choose one which is useful and practical, not one subject to the whims of fashion or the meandering evolution of personal taste. The only practical tattoos are mnemonic devices, but even then you may come to regret permanently branding yourself with a reminder. Best to just paint your opinions on you mind, because minds are easy (and cheap) to renovate. Pardon the pontificating.

A decade from now you will probably regret this, fam. At least you aren't as bad off as the people I've known who branded themselves with video game symbolism. Poor dumb plebs.

Then why not just buy a painting and put it on the wall?

I've never had a problem with tattoos. I don't have, nor want any, myself, but I don't care if other people get them. Naturally, some tattoos are more indicative of stupidity/personal degeneracy, but the ink itself isn't.

I see I'm dealing with a teenager.
After we strip your reply of insults and aspersions (these soothe your ego but are not arguments), we are left with "Tesla has an SI unit named after him."
In this way he is no different than scores of other great men, men who are seldom mentioned in conversation outside of academic circles, because they do not have the cult of personality which ensures their memories are kept alive as a part of daily goings on.
Don't try to claim that the general public has the first idea what any of these people look like. Tesla on the other hand, was a showman. Volts and Amps are mentioned hundreds of times more frequently than Teslas yet don't tell me you have any idea what either of these men looks like; and if you did you'd be a very rare exception.

The idea is not the man. "Anonymous scientists" are not remembered, as already shown, even those credited with discoveries mentioned in daily life can remain obscure without artwork to keep their images alive.
What the fuck are you babbling about? Have you accidentally taken my post out of context, or is this rather annoying behavior, along with starting every sentence with an insult or aspersion, something you do regularly and with intent?
The context: what causes people to be remembered in daily life
The solution: artwork depicting them. Millions of paintings, bronzes and photographs are testimony to this.

If you reply in such a dishonest way again I will not answer.

HIT THE NAIL RIGHT ON THE FUCKING HEAD!!! Especially with women. They love having a little phrase or picture somewhere on their bodies that makes them think they're more than what they really are. My cousin is that way. She has daddy issues and self esteem issues as well.

I would never get a tattoo unless I was a soldier or a sailor or something. When I was growing up the only people who had tattoos were people like that and a lot of them had some kind of religious symbolism in them which is understandable given their progressions. I wouldn't get a tattoo like that because I'd feel like a poser quite frankly.

*Progressions
*Professions

By the way, this exemplifies what I wrote in my first reply, about those who ignore the realities of human nature.
The intellectual understands human nature and exploits it, trying to change human nature is the left's game.

It's so lulzworthy that these threads are filled with "tattoos are degeneracy", when the white ancestors and white cultures of old that Holla Forums reveres so much had no problem with body art. Sure it was intimidating warlike designs, but tats are tats. Get over yourselves, you've all lost sight of what degeneracy is.

I know one who got a tattoo of a serotonin molecule on her arm.

Does she do MDMA too?

I especially hate those tattoos that look like they've been pulled from some life affirming image macro posted on Facebook.

No, it really isn't.
What is "lulzworthy" is that you fail to grasp context. A tattoo enscribed as a rite of passage, usually following a difficult trial involving physical hardship or danger, was given for completely different reasons than a contemporary fashion tattoo and thus carries a totally different meaning.

An ancient tattoo symbolized the trial it is proof of. A modern tattoo symbolizes sexual availablity and degeneracy. The tattoo is just a symbol and the meaning of symbols is not fixed.

I don't know if she still does but she used to use it heavily. She sought psychological help for various "issues" a few years after her ecstasy and club binge and the therapist basically told her "you've destroyed your serotonin system with this stuff, what do you expect me to do about it?"

permanent reminder of temporary feelings

I've always considered tattoos and piercings to be degenerate and indicative of a superficial "looking-glass self" mode of personal understanding. Most people with an interest in artificially embellishing their external appearance possess little depth of character and tend to be extremely boring and shallow non-individuals. For what it's worth, my wife doesn't even have her ears pierced and hates jewelry; her blue eyes and womanly qualities are more lovely than all the artificial adornment in the world.

So you're a degenerate AND a coward.

You have nailed it.
Aside from signalling sexual availability, the tattoo also acts to turn the drab, the inane, the insipid into something superficially interesting, different, novel.
Teenage girls are especially prone to tattoo for this reason, because the vast, vast majority of teenage girls have nothing to set them apart from every other carbon copy teenage girl.
And yes, boys don't tend to suffer from this problem. Even the most boring and autistic teenage boy is likely to have one or two niche interests that can make him interesting in the right circumstances, something he can talk about in depth. Women have only pop culture and their vaginas, hence tattoos and piercings.

The sexual signalling is real too though, numerous studies show piercings and tattoos to correlate with promiscuity and drug use.

...

I had a feeling. When I was younger, I did molly once. ONCE! Ever since I've considered myself lucky I didn't suffer an endorphin storm or a heart attack. That was back when I had shit friends though. I'm still disgusted with myself, every time I think back to that shitty decision. Now I'm so squemish around drugs, I wont even touch cough syrup.

Nowhere did I say that I equate any tattoo with an earned war tattoo, so please stop putting words in my mouth to try to "win the argument". All I'm saying is, nobody looked down on tattoos then, so it's hypocritical of ancestry-revering Holla Forums to look down upon them now. Now sure, getting a tattoo of an anime chick shoving a hotdog up her vagoo is not equal to something the Vikings would have done, but most people get tattoos of things that have some kind of meaning to them. A loved one, some philosophical or religious quote, some object closely tied to a moment that changed their lives, something like that. Maybe even just Darth Vader's mask, if they loved those movies that damn much. But if that's your bar for "degeneracy", then I guarantee that you've done at least five degenerate things today already.

There is nothing wrong with tattoos. Even if you get something kind of stupid, like a Piranha Plant or something, there is nothing wrong with tattoos. Get over yourself.

It shows promise as an adjunct in PTSD counselling but as a recreational drug, it's really not as benign as people make out.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, I'm expressing corollaries which derive from what you wrote.
By using ancient tattoos to argue in favour of modern ones, or in an attempt to show some sort of hypocrisy, you ARE equating them. If they aren't equated, how can you use the one to argue for the other?

This here is exactly my point:
No, it isn't hypocritical at all, for the reasons already stated.
Ancestors who had tattooing incorporated into their culture did not look down upon tattoos because the reason for the tattooing was compatible with a healthy culture. Understand, the problem isn't ink in the skin, it's the motivation, meaning, implications of such within a given culture which determines whether said ink stain is a good or a bad thing.
In OUR culture it is a bad thing because tattoos are associated today with criminality, sexual promiscuity, disease and drug use.

Are you White knighting for a tatted up girl you like, or do you have one yourself?
Like, man!

/thread

No.

No.

What makes you think that they wanted to be remembered for what they look like?

My point was NOT that a man should be remembered, but that IF he gets remembered, he should be remembered for his ideas and craft, rather than because of some shallow nonsense. None of those scientists would have been remembered would it not been for their scientific advances, no matter the feathers they had on their hats.

No.

If you love your people you won't exploit it, for the same reason you don't exploit your parents, sisters and relatives. If you have a deep blood connection and you can relate to your kin, you won't exploit them.

I understand that Weev has a good intention with that tattoo as a way to radically inform the people of the dangers of comformative thinking. I think we both know he wouldn't encourage his kids to make any tattoos, even if he sacrificed himself for the good fight.

I agree. Alot of beautiful women don't need cosmetics to be physically attractive.

It depends on many different factors.

Do you want to be trendy?
Degenerate.

Do you want to represent something greater than yourself by getting a tatto representing your culture?
Acceptable.

Does the tattoo cover your face, chest, legs and arms? Do you also have piercings?
Degenerate.

Do you have a tatto on your arm to remind you of who you are or where you came from?
Acceptable.

See how this works?

You can either be a faggot with tattoos or someone who simply has one or two with deep meaning behind them.

Yes there is.

Nonsense.

Nonsense.

Absolute nonsense. See pic related. Its the only tattoo a Waffen SS soldier needed. A tattoo to identify his dead corpse.

I don't give a shit, it's gonna look badass.

was reply to

Yeah, the social/sexual signaling that tattoos and piercings represent in the modern world, much like problem hair, is a huge red flag. Hearing some sloot brag about getting her nipples pierced, or God forbid her clit, is absolutely revolting.
The conflation of ancestral body modification with its modern counterparts is extremely flawed, because as stated it was associated with some sort of rite of passage or significant achievement. The aboriginal Australians, stupid as they are, had to endure both thumbnails being ripped off with a sharpened kangaroo bone, among other trials, before they could access their tribe's sacred ancestral churinga stones. If they got a tattoo to symbolize this it meant something. Some faggot getting "carpe diem" or a guy fawkes mask tattooed doesn't mean shit.

He was a known showman. It's strange that you would dispute this, his tendencies to performance are well documented.

I made no such claim. What they wanted to be remembered for (if anything) does not change what is effective in keeping a person's memory alive. I see that you're continuing your pattern of dishonesty despite a polite plea to the contrary. That is unfortunate.
"Should". Again you refuse to accept human nature. Just like men "should" find fat women attractive, it's not going to happen to any significant degree, ever, barring genetic engineering or selective breeding. Likewise a luminary is unlikely to be remembered and discussed by ordinary folk on a daily basis, regardless of how great his contribution to humanity, without those people having a mental image to refer to.
Hence, people of all ages discuss Tesla, create fan fiction, comics, design and circulate memes featuring him on a daily basis, but not J.J Thompson, Newton or Ampere. This isn't because the latter men failed to provide significant and daily relevant contributions to humanity, it's because Tesla left a legacy of showy photographs and a cult of personality which make him easy to visualize and, for humans, who are visual beings, to recall.
Without said cultural legacy he would be more like Ampere or Volta.
Tesla is just one example. The point is that graphical depictions of historical figures are very important to their continued cultural life. Without that the idea lives but the man dies, like Volta and Ampere.

You are good at deliberately taking words out of context.

I am one of the most active content producers in the "alt-right" or white nationalist movement. I have a few tattoos. It means nothing, honestly. My life doesn't revolve around them, and I am still more active in helping our community than 99.9999999% of you shitposters.

Anyone who is openly "anti-tattoo" is virtue signaling and probably is attempting to forget or hide their own flaws.

If you actually spend time thinking about this kind of shit instead of doing something to make the world a better place or to push it in the direction you want to see it moving, you are nothing. Your opinions on degeneracy are meaningless because you take no actions to do anything about it. You are just sitting in your chair, having arbitrary pseudo-intellectual conversations that rarely evolve into anything worth reading.

Tattoos was pretty common with nordic pagans. If you want to connect with those roots. Why not?

not every discussion has to be about actual important shit, I'm half tempted to think this is bait because you are the one who is literally just entering this thread to virtue signal how much of a fucking "Intellectual" you are. Quit getting so triggered by casual bantz about fucking tattoos you fedora wearing autist

Fucking kek!

If you're going to make a post like that you might as well tell us who you are.

Sure, but that doesn't take away from how pointless this topic is. Do you think anyone is going to leave this thread with a different perspective on this issue? Or am I the only one who picks the threads I go into because I think I might actually learn something from it?

Why are you using quotes around the word "intellectual"? I never said that word. You sound buttblasted because you just realized how much time you wasting on this website.

Slutty tattoos on women are generally pretty hot

Unless you are actively bringing more blue-eyed white babies into the world, all your slacktivist alt-right content creation means relatively little, though it certainly helps. Don't get so butthurt, I doubt your tattoos are as degenerate as hipsters with "love me or leave me alone" and other stupid shit are.

Look mom, I drew pictures on my skin!! Infantile degenracy for the most part. I only accept small tattoos traditionally connected to real achievements (graduates of army ranger course etc)

Do you walk up to your coworkers who are discussing the weather and sports and ask them why they aren't discussing IMPORTANT things and call them pseudo-intellectuals?

How much of a vapid autist are you?

I'm gonna go ahead and take a shot in the dark here and say the only person in the 'Alt-Right' that comes to mind who could possibly get triggered by something like this and feel the need to let everyone know how he spends his time producing oh so important 'content' is that kike-worshipping faggot Bulbasaur

I had no idea that getting a tattoo of some religious or philosophical scripture, some date that means something to you, a loved one, some person or moment that shaped your life, a symbol of something that means something to you, or even just a fucking epic piece of art, were all just criminality, sexual promiscuity, disease and drug use.

I'm not white knighting and I do not have a tattoo. I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy and stupidity of this whole discussion.

But as long as we're strawmanning, my turn: Did a tatted up girl turn you down for the prom, or are you just too scared to get one yourself?

No.

Your delusions are not my concern.

I don't recognize "fertile" women as the same thing as "fat". With that said, from an eugenic point of view: men shouldn't find "fat" women attractive, they should find "fertile women" attractive, which they still do in many european countries. Where the pedophiles from companies like "Victorias Secret" hasn't spread its infection yet.

Discussed by ordinary folk on a daily basis? I assume you want someone to be both a folk-hero and a great man by utility? Ok lets add the following assumption to that one: Lets assume society is perfect: Now, don't you think that If someone makes a great contribution to society, it will be noticed by the sheer nature of how mass media works and how society is designed since they both want to promote good behavior?

I have no idea what you mean with "an image" , do you mean a photograph of their face? Printed art related to their work? If that is the case, I can mention several pioneers who were recognized hundreds of years after their death, without any such "images" promoting their ideas. No, you have no idea what you are talking about. Ideas are valued by their utility and people are valued by the worth of the utility of the ideas they produce (if not simply by the value of their hard labor). Recreational tattoos have basically zero utility and are absolutely degenerate to the point of being literal cancer. Look up: "Toxic tattoo ink" .

Please read this point:

Calm down now. People who have tattoos are welcome to regret them and be accepted into the movement. They don't even have to remove them. But they are not welcome to promote them. I'm afraid I cannot see any reason for anyone to make any more of a compromise than that.

All tattoos are fucking degenerate. End of discussion.

...

Yeah, it's so degenerate and cowardly being able to have high paying jobs. Don't worry, you can get a tattoo when you move out of your mom's basement.

Whenever I see anyone with a tattoo its basically a sign to me that says "ask me about my double digit IQ"

The tides are slowly turning in that regard, thankfully. Give it ten years and I think we'll finally be in a world where people can have amazing body art in job interviews without discrimination. I look forward to the full arm sleeves of dragons and thorns, and all the other amazing art that can be done.

/Thread

A tattoo indicates that you are trash and have poor long term decision making.

gr8 b8 m8

Kinda depends really.
If you are going to have edgy skulls and all that, it looks more like a neo nazi but if you have some class to the tattoos and remember to re-color them so they get the same tone, as it was first tattooed. Its no problem at-all.

Just remember have something that is not supposed to be edgy, you will regret it almost the day you go away from the shop.
I got mine because I was at the dentist and did not get any painkillers, so I had to combat pain with pain. It hurts later btw,

Nobody is judging those that already have tattoos. Now, what I don't understand is why people can't fathom the elements of propaganda, why would You want to encourage people to get tattoos? How does that make sense? Why allow it? Do you want your people to end up having tattoos all over their body? Why settle with tattoos? Why not encourage total body modifications? Or hell, why settle with body modifications? Why not embrace total human transhumanism alltogether. OH wait, that argument will just result in some pro-tat propagandist to say "nice strawman!", since reducing the argument of body mods to absurdity doesn't apply to them. (Since they are magical snowflakes with very important scriptures that cannot afford to be written on anything else than on their skin)

No, the only tattoo that i would encourage and tolerate is a small tattoo of your blood group. Nothing else. (In case there would be war and you need transfusion)

That same argument can be used for the promotion of any modern degenerate behavior I'm afraid. You might as well say that you reject all degeneracy theory altogether.

In my opinon tattoos that symbolise something you're loyal to, describe your ideals etc. are ok if there's not too much of them.

Tattoos aren't inherently degenerate. Their popularity has gone back and forth between the upper and lower classes. Originally, they were only obtained by sailors, and later prisoners, but they became en vogue multiple times throughout history with different royal courts and aristocracies as either a mark of their extensive travels to far eastern lands or their having obtained an exotic retinue. Pic related is Tzar Nicholas II with a color tattoo of dragon from Japan on his arm, and King Frederick of Denmark with multiple. If any of you happen to be in Chicago in October, Field Museum will have an exhibit of historical tattoo art.

They were able to become mainstream only with the invention of the modern tattoo machine. Before then, large works took many hours and were extremely uncommon - Tzar Nicholas II's dragon tattoo took reportedly 7 hours. It could be completed in 3-4 hours today. Today you see a second resurgence with the revival of traditional "stick n poke" being done diy at home with better sanitation developments, resulting in the hipster trend of simplistic, small line art pieces that can be competently completed with little training in the craft.

Only normalfags get tattoos for symbolism. That's the most trite, trashy kind of tattoo possible. If you think a tattoo that just "looks nice" is dumb, you should put down the videogames and television and try going to your local art museum for once.

Tattoos are a decorative craft using the body as a canvas, their aesthetic beauty is the primary intention. Many also treat it less as a canvas than a gallery, "collecting" pieces from preferred artists or from its multiple rich historical traditions.

Getting a text tattoo, unless the art is calligraphic in nature, because it "means something" is incredibly shallow. Tattoos can be elevated to the status of art, imo, only if they carry a degree of self-reflexivity to either a historical or contextual tradition in regards to the tattoo or the nature of the work's physical construction.

You just sound terrified of limiting job prospects. Tattoos aren't about getting something that you'll "like forever". They demarcate you at the moment you got from which you'll never be again forever onwards, like a coming-of-age ceremony. It's a ritual cataloguing personal aesthetic development.

This is why women should never have tattoos. They don't have the proper critical self-awareness or aesthetic maturity - and it doesn't suit the feminine body.

post sauce retard, there isn't really evidence beyond some out-of-context pics influenced by roman propaganda to point to the idea that northern europeans actually wore tattoos in large quantities. in fact to a celtic noble man, desecrating the perfection of the symmetry of the male form would have disrupted their analogue to vedic karma and thereby been an extreme negative. there was an irish king of ancient times who had his hand chopped off and thus marring his perfection he had to have a hand of silver fabricated to complete his form less he exist as a 'incomplete' being.

I own my own cinema at the age of 23, I live alone since I'm 16, I spent a lot of time with local (Parisian) far right groups, I put a lot, and recently more & more, of energy doing shit for those, and to prepare the incoming presidential election.

I have already some tattoos, and intend to get a lot more. Never anywhere publicly showing tho.

I'm not defending against some of you, I'm not attacking any of you, but I see a lot of projecting in this thread.
Some fellow polack are so insecure that they feel superior to someone because of inked scars.
I do too, sometimes, when I see someone with nigger tier tattoos. Tribals, facebook macro tier sentance, you see what I mean.

I did them because I loved the aesthetics, and the story they conveyed.
Considering the tattoo as an art, it's a tribute to the begining of the tattoo era in Russian Gulag and French overseas prisons.

I had problems with alcohol, womens and drugs by the past, some records with the justice but nothing serious, so yes, I think you can feel smug about me, smug and superior because you have been able to pull yourselves above everything you deems degenerate, but for some, this is a trap, and once you're in, it's a long path put with no quick exit.
For some that have knew nothing else from the very beginning, it will still be a part of my history, a part of me.

This user gets it, ol'time handpoke, begining of the previous century designs, craving a kind of aesthetics rather than seeking some BS symbolism, that's exactly how I see this too.

the pics are olds

Not a good idea to share your ink & location here, user.

If someone here doxx me I pay him a beer and that's it.

I never done anything illegal and this site, and I have virtually no boss.

We must stop to be afraid like children are afraid of the monster under the bed. I present a strong zero interest to doxx.

Except a free beer, wich is already a lot considering the price of the beer here.

inb4 he says "B-b-but the vikings had tattoos in the vikings tv show!"

But, user why do you have to put it on your body? Why not just get a painting? Or a tshirt? Or why not just paint your walls with art? What makes the skin so special? Why would you want to irreversibly put that there?

Look if we are going to make a decision on tattoos, we need to either accept them 100% or reject them 100% because nobody in here has the authority to decide what is "the better tattoo art".

Tattoos are very very hilarious. Think of their cultural value.

Not only did they originate with gross tribal niggers and gooks, but in more modern times they were associated with taboo.

Badass.

Different and ballsy.

Gangsters.

Within the last 10 years or so, tattoos suddenly became girly little accessories tier

Any fat tranny, weak little cuck can and does have plenty.

And the most hilarious part is.

ITS PERMANENT

A FAD PERMANENTLY ON YOU

Thats some hilarious, laughably pathetic shit. Even funnier is the fact that the human mind works in a way where no thing is really appealing to one that long.

So if they have a change of heart- its dealwithit.png

Hahahahahaah

tramp stamps are really the only acceptable form of tattoo on a woman, and even then they don't belong on college princesses, but on genuine 100 percent trashy girls who don't delude themselves into thinking they are special or better than men, i.e. all that really remains of femininity in this nihilist hellscape

Because they are not meant to be paintings or anything that you can put on a wall.

At best, they would be doodles on papers, exposing them would non sensical. Because it's an artform in itself. Like a painter paint a picture, he choose carefully every touch of colour, every lighting, every details he want to it.

I'd say that I consider my body to be a kind of canvas, and by choosing this or this tattoo artist to do the next thing I have in mind, is like choosing the good brush for the next paint touch.
The only point is that I find it beautiful on it's own way. I don't care showing them, sporting wifebeater to show them at all time, I just love how they are alltogether on my skin.

And I don't like Tshirts with pictures on it

Now, that is the slickest BTFO cap I have ever read about.

You are a turbofag

Some are acceptable. Like a Holla Forums knot to buff meme magic and shoo away kikery.

You're trying so hard to refute my point, but you can't even write your first sentence without a quanitifier. "THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAD TATTOOS… in large quantities." So, even by your own argument, there IS evidence that they had tattoos. Even if they didn't go full Yakuza with it, they had tattoos. The white ancestors that Holla Forums revere so much had tattoos. By evidence, by your own admission.

So, thank you for admitting that I'm right.

Don't you think the graffitti artists could say the same thing about my real estate being their canvas too?

I understand that there is some form of pleasure coming from the act of transforming your body. But think this through user, imagine that 100 million people are listening to your words. Do you really want to tell them to go do tattoos?

Even if you know that it will with 99% certainty increase your personal happiness, how will such a decision reflect on the state? What would the "Body Modification" community think now? Should amputation of arms and legs be considered acceptable? How do you think your decision of promoting this behavior reflect on the overall happiness of a nation? Hell, if "modifying the Body" is OK, why not let people do sexual correction? How would you answer those questions to the state? Who is to say what kind of irreversible transformation is acceptable? When does a behavior become "too extreme" to be tolerated?

Tattoos are trashy. The human body is a masterpiece millions of years in the making. Geting a tattoo is the equivalent of scrawling on the Venus de Milo with crayon.

The graffiti analogy doesn't really work. There's a clear-cut difference between some gang tag or teenage vandalism and something like pic related.

Not your body, not your business, that's when.

Don't expect people like him to understand the difference. To people like him, that amazing art is no different from a doodle of a stick figure with a dick, and it's defacing his proud business and the peeling paint on its false brick siding.

This. What I plan on doing is having from my shoulder joint to my elbow on each arm being covered in the symbols of everything I love, along with some Celtic designs to Honor my Ancestery

Do you think the majority of people that walk pass that street will enjoy it as much as you do?

And how about the security aspect. Do you think it will be easy to spot cracks in the building with all that on? Is it really necessary to make that art on the walls? Who is to decide what art is to be on the public spaces? Which buildings are supposed to have art on them? You think I'm going to let you do that to my house?

You do know that it's not illegal to spray graffiti on your own house that you own , right?

Search for "ghetto" on google images. And post the first image result that shows up please. What does it show?

Now search for "Rich neighborhood", what does it show?

They won't be truly wrong,; except that they have no rights over it, so it's unlawnful.

If they do it on a wall of their property, it would indeed be their canva.

I would never preach tattoos to someone, to strangers or whatever. I have gone into tattoo by myself, and I think it's the way poeple that end up inked should follow.
Tattoos looks way better when their are truly unique (I have yet to see someone with anything looking like mine) and that's what I love about it. The generic Rose/dragon/japanese/tribal/Heart/wings is so fucking boring, because it just look like you got a tattoo just to have a tattoo, you have just opened the portfolio of the artist and screamed "This one!" and you end up looking like 90% of the inked folks.

I don't think about what I do through the prism of a whole nation. And there is a world between amputation and doodles on skin.

Your analogy is kind of :
You drink beer sometimes

Putting tattoo and amputation on the same level is saying that cutting a heart with a knife on a three is almost the same as putting the whole three down.

For the records, I'm disguted by piercings, scarification & volunteer amputation is proof of mental illness