Escort and Tattoos

[Guest RexB]

It's interesting, the arch tone that people often use when expressing their distaste for tattooes, almost as though they take it as a personal insult that a total stranger elected to modify his appearance by getting tattooed.

 

Well, as much as it's a person's private decision and business to get tattoos on their body, getting tattoos is also just as much, or even moreso, done in hopes of getting notice or admiration of the tattoos by others. Most tattoos can't even be seen by the wearer of them, especially those on the back of the body or on the shoulders, unless they take off their clothes and stand in a mirror holding another mirror. For those of us who don't feel that tattoos are an enhancement of the body, but are more of a detraction, it can be disturbing to see what one considers beautiful in its unmarked state to be ruined by this kind of permanent alteration.

[Rudynate]

I'm a great admirer of well-formed pecs. When the beautiful, natural lines of the masculine form are broken by tattoos, I feel I'm deprived of my desire to admire and appreciate the beauty. So, I'm not insulted by the tattoos, but feel deprived of something that I might otherwise greatly enjoy.

 

There are an awful lot of men out there with well-formed pecs the natural lines of which are unbroken by tattoos. You could focus on them instead of the two or three that have ruined your view.

[Rudynate]

Well, as much as it's a person's private decision and business to get tattoos on their body, getting tattoos is also just as much, or even moreso, done in hopes of getting notice or admiration of the tattoos by others. Most tattoos can't even be seen by the wearer of them, especially those on the back of the body or on the shoulders, unless they take off their clothes and stand in a mirror holding another mirror. For those of us who don't feel that tattoos are an enhancement of the body, but are more of a detraction, it can be disturbing to see what one considers beautiful in its unmarked state to be ruined by this kind of permanent alteration.

 

A good solution to being easily disturbed by things in the outer environment is to stay home more.

 

I doubt whether Boomer Banks is losing much sleep over the fact that a few people don't like his tats.

[Guest RexB]

A good solution to being easily disturbed by things in the outer environment is to stay home more.

 

I doubt whether Boomer Banks is losing much sleep over the fact that a few people don't like his tats.

 

Funny you should use Boomer Banks as a retort to my statement. I have never, for the life of me, been able to see the appeal of Boomer Banks, tattoos or not, despite all the hype about him. If you want to get a rise out of me you'll have to come up with someone even slightly attractive to do that.

 

I'd like to hear a rational explanation as to what moves one to get all scribbled up with tattoos. Is it some kind of feeling of not being enough just as one is that requires one to make all these additions? Is it purely a desire to be considered cool by one's peers who are obsessed with getting more and more tattoos as some kind of badge of worthiness? Is it an addiction to the physical pain that getting a tattoo incurs? Is it some kind of 'rebel' thing to do? I'd sincerely like to hear about it.

 

Back in 1971 I hitchhiked from Austin, Texas to San Francisco because I wanted to get a tattoo by the same guy who did Janis Joplin's tattoo, Lyle Tuttle. At that time practically nobody got tattoos except guys in the military and civilian "white trash", so it was a fresh idea for someone who wasn't in either of those categories. At that time it was a truly rebellious thing to do.

Well, I went to his studio and, after that couple of thousand mile journey, I backed out. That's really all I have to say about that, I just backed out.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Lyle+tuttle&espv=2&biw=1106&bih=518&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0CIkBEIkeahUKEwjulrbbie3HAhXJqB4KHeN1A_g

[corndog]

There are an awful lot of men out there with well-formed pecs the natural lines of which are unbroken by tattoos. You could focus on them instead of the two or three that have ruined your view.

I think you misinterpreted the tone of my comment. In an earlier post, you seemed interested and curious about why people seemed "insulted" by stranger's tattoos. I was trying to explain that I'm not insulted by them, but they detract from that person's attractiveness to me. I don't begrudge a person's decision to get tattoos, but it does make them less attractive to me, as I explained. I'm sometimes slightly saddened when I see an otherwise very attractive person who has, in my eyes, tarnished their physique with unflattering ink.

 

Let's assume that we're all here to understand different points of view. I'm not asking you to change your mind about tattoos. I'm just assuming that you're interested in understanding other people's perspective.

[Rudynate]

I think you misinterpreted the tone of my comment. In an earlier post, you seemed interested and curious about why people seemed "insulted" by stranger's tattoos. I was trying to explain that I'm not insulted by them, but they detract from that person's attractiveness to me. I don't begrudge a person's decision to get tattoos, but it does make them less attractive to me, as I explained. I'm sometimes slightly saddened when I see an otherwise very attractive person who has, in my eyes, tarnished their physique with unflattering ink.

 

Let's assume that we're all here to understand different points of view. I'm not asking you to change your mind about tattoos. I'm just assuming that you're interested in understanding other people's perspective.

 

 

I understand that. I can't help but poke fun when people start wringing their hands about tattoos. It isn't the fall of western civilization.

[Rudynate]

Funny you should use Boomer Banks as a retort to my statement. I have never, for the life of me, been able to see the appeal of Boomer Banks, tattoos or not, despite all the hype about him. If you want to get a rise out of me you'll have to come up with someone even slightly attractive to do that.

 

I did get a rise out of you - a "no-rise" rise, an "it takes more than this to get my goat" rise. As to Boomer Banks, he's an awfully popular porn star. And he seems to be doing fine in spite of having the grievous character defect of being covered with tattoos. End of story.

[Guest RexB]

I did get a rise out of you - a "no-rise" rise, an "it takes more than this to get my goat" rise. As to Boomer Banks, he's an awfully popular porn star. And he seems to be doing fine in spite of having the grievous character defect of being covered with tattoos. End of story.

 

No one except you has made any allusions to there being some kind of character defect in one deciding to get tattoos, even if it's masked by an accusation that others are doing it. Everyone else has only stated their opinion and perhaps bewilderment about why one would make that choice. There's nothing morally right or morally wrong about tattoos. It's just a taste thing.

I asked some questions in one of my previous posts hoping to get some answers to help to clarify the possible motivations for getting tattoos but those are being ignored in favor of histrionic statements about falls of civilizations and hand-wringing, neither of which anyone has done in this discussion.

[corndog]

There are an awful lot of men out there with well-formed pecs the natural lines of which are unbroken by tattoos. You could focus on them instead of the two or three that have ruined your view.

I understand that. I can't help but poke fun when people start wringing their hands about tattoos. It isn't the fall of western civilization.

Maybe the voices in your head read the first quote differently than I do, but I don't see any indication of tone that suggests you were "poking fun." At the substantial risk of making it seem like this is personal, your statements read like those of a person who is defending tattoos because, after all, he's pretty much stuck with them.

 

For the most part, this thread has done pretty well avoiding judgement and prejudice about tattoos and the people who have them. People have expressed their opinions about how tattoos effect attraction, and in some cases even exposed the historical and cultural biases that effect their opinions. There is no reason to be defensive: no one is attacking you (except maybe me at this point). We're not saying that tattoos are wrong, immoral, trashy, ugly or low-class. Some of us have stated that they aren't attractive to us while other have stated that they are.

[Rudynate]

No one except you has made any allusions to there being some kind of character defect in one deciding to get tattoos, even if it's masked by an accusation that others are doing it. Everyone else has only stated their opinion and perhaps bewilderment about why one would make that choice. There's nothing morally right or morally wrong about tattoos. It's just a taste thing.

I asked some questions in one of my previous posts hoping to get some answers to help to clarify the possible motivations for getting tattoos but those are being ignored in favor of histrionic statements about falls of civilizations and hand-wringing, neither of which anyone has done in this discussion.

 

And I chose to ignore them. You said yourself that you were at the threshold of getting a tattoo. Thus, you have personal knowledge of some of the reasons one would get a tattoo. You realized, whatever your reasons were, that they weren't strong enough for you to go through with it. You yourself enumerated a few of the dysfunctions that people who dislike tattoos attribute to those who have tattoos.

[Rudynate]

Maybe the voices in your head read the first quote differently than I do, but I don't see any indication of tone that suggests you were "poking fun." At the substantial risk of making it seem like this is personal, your statements read like those of a person who is defending tattoos because, after all, he's pretty much stuck with them.

 

For the most part, this thread has done pretty well avoiding judgement and prejudice about tattoos and the people who have them. People have expressed their opinions about how tattoos effect attraction, and in some cases even exposed the historical and cultural biases that effect their opinions. There is no reason to be defensive: no one is attacking you (except maybe me at this point). We're not saying that tattoos are wrong, immoral, trashy, ugly or low-class. Some of us have stated that they aren't attractive to us while other have stated that they are.

 

I don't see anything confrontive in what I said. I made a helpful suggestion to lessen your distress. I'm hurt that you would spurn it.

[+ goosh69]

This is thread about escorts and tattoos. Most of us are less attracted to men who CHOOSE to get tattoos. That is all. No one Said anything more or less, so I sense defensiveness or offense when none is warranted. Also, I dislike having sex with men who have tattoos.

[Wolfer]

For me it depends on the design of the tattoo. I absolutely love tattoo's that work with a guy's body shape, enhancing it, mostly these would in the range of tribals, abstract lines and such. I don't like pictures that much (of things, people, ...) since often they seem to have no relation to the body part they're on. Having said that, I recently saw a guy who, to my mind, had ugly tattoo's but once I was in bed with him I totally forgot about all that as he was just so hot (in every way). So I'm really, really, glad I didn't let the tattoo's keep me from booking an appointment with him.

 

But I have certainly nothing against tattoo's on principle. The only thing I always wonder about is the fact it's pretty much permanent... This is a reason I will never (and never can) get a tattoo, I change my mind way too often about what I like.

[Rudynate]

For me it depends on the design of the tattoo. I absolutely love tattoo's that work with a guy's body shape, enhancing it, mostly these would in the range of tribals, abstract lines and such. I don't like pictures that much (of things, people, ...) since often they seem to have no relation to the body part they're on. Having said that, I recently saw a guy who, to my mind, had ugly tattoo's but once I was in bed with him I totally forgot about all that as he was just so hot (in every way). So I'm really, really, glad I didn't let the tattoo's keep me from booking an appointment with him.

 

But I have certainly nothing against tattoo's on principle. The only thing I always wonder about is the fact it's pretty much permanent... This is a reason I will never (and never can) get a tattoo, I change my mind way too often about what I like.

 

 

Tattoos are definitely not for the comitment-phobic.

[Rudynate]

. I don't like pictures that much (of things, people, ...) since often they seem to have no relation to the body part they're on..

 

A poorly-placed or poorly-chosen design can be disastrous. There is a guy who works out at my gym who has small individual tattoos all over his legs. He is a very handsome, very well-built guy. The tattoos on his legs seem sort of randomly chosen and randomly placed and the whole thing just looks busy. The tats on his legs make me think of little boys' PJs - sort of like cowboys or rocketships all over his legs. Whenever I see him, I always ask myself, "What were you thinking?" He wears workout shorts, obviously doesn't see any reason to cover them up, so I guess he's happy with them.

 

You have to really think the design through. Whenever, I'm contemplating a new piece, I think it over for months before I even talk to the artist, and then he and I usually talk a few times before we finalize the design. From initial concept to finished tattoo is 8 or 9 months.

[+ Tom Isern]

It's interesting, the arch tone that people often use when expressing their distaste for tattooes, almost as though they take it as a personal insult that a total stranger elected to modify his appearance by getting tattooed.

 

agreed. "repulsive" "detest" "hate" "disfigure" "irrational"—when we make the mistake of thinking that our own erotic tastes/desires are "normal," and that people who think/behave differently are somehow irrational or insecure, doing detestable, hateful, repulsive, things that disqualify them as sexual partners... wow. how is that really different from what straight people did to their erotic others for centuries? maybe people with tattoos should be burned at the stake? lobotomized? imprisoned?

 

this kind of commentary does a real disservice to the gay community for several reasons. first, because it polices other people's desires—"ish. yuck. you're into THAT? that's sick. disgusting. revolting." it demands erotic conformity to ultra-narrow definitions. that's immature. second, when you think this way, you close down the possibilities in your own erotic development and future. rather than position yourself against the possibility that you might ever find someone with tattoos attractive, isn't the better option to be open to the possibility that you might find one more thing in this world beautiful, hot, and desirable? I overcame my distaste for tattoos in kind of the same way I overcame my dislike for Indian and Chinese food—I grew up.

 

I would expect to hear this kind of narrow-minded, erotophobic conversation in the sunday school classroom of a southern baptist church, where it would be at home. I'm kind of appalled to find it here.

[Guest RexB]

agreed. "repulsive" "detest" "hate" "disfigure" "irrational"—when we make the mistake of thinking that our own erotic tastes/desires are "normal," and that people who think/behave differently are somehow irrational or insecure, doing detestable, hateful, repulsive, things that disqualify them as sexual partners... wow. how is that really different from what straight people did to their erotic others for centuries? maybe people with tattoos should be burned at the stake? lobotomized? imprisoned?

 

I really don't know where you read all this virulent condemnation of tattooed people in this thread. Making the leap from simply not liking tattoos to condemning the people that have them is something you seem to be projecting onto the people who simply don't like tattoos. Not liking tattoos has nothing to do with judgment of the character of people who have them no matter how much one may be tempted to make tattooed people into yet another victimized group. At least not for me it doesn't.

[+ SundayZip]

agreed. "repulsive" "detest" "hate" "disfigure" "irrational"—when we make the mistake of thinking that our own erotic tastes/desires are "normal," and that people who think/behave differently are somehow irrational or insecure, doing detestable, hateful, repulsive, things that disqualify them as sexual partners... wow. how is that really different from what straight people did to their erotic others for centuries? maybe people with tattoos should be burned at the stake? lobotomized? imprisoned?

 

I read back from the postings in this thread and, yes, there are a few who used strong words to express their dislike for tattoos. But the theme that I get from most posters is that they love the male body and prefer to see skin in its original, unaltered state. This is a statement of their preferences. There's also a honest lack of understanding and confusion about why people choose to extensively alter their appearance with tattoos. There is no one who stating the tattoos are innately wrong nor are they trying to convince others to their way of thinking. My quote from Leviticus was meant to be humor.

[Rudynate]

agreed. "repulsive" "detest" "hate" "disfigure" "irrational"—when we make the mistake of thinking that our own erotic tastes/desires are "normal," and that people who think/behave differently are somehow irrational or insecure, doing detestable, hateful, repulsive, things that disqualify them as sexual partners... wow. how is that really different from what straight people did to their erotic others for centuries? maybe people with tattoos should be burned at the stake? lobotomized? imprisoned?

 

this kind of commentary does a real disservice to the gay community for several reasons. first, because it polices other people's desires—"ish. yuck. you're into THAT? that's sick. disgusting. revolting." it demands erotic conformity to ultra-narrow definitions. that's immature. second, when you think this way, you close down the possibilities in your own erotic development and future. rather than position yourself against the possibility that you might ever find someone with tattoos attractive, isn't the better option to be open to the possibility that you might find one more thing in this world beautiful, hot, and desirable? I overcame my distaste for tattoos in kind of the same way I overcame my dislike for Indian and Chinese food—I grew up.

 

I would expect to hear this kind of narrow-minded, erotophobic conversation in the sunday school classroom of a southern baptist church, where it would be at home. I'm kind of appalled to find it here.

 

That's a nice piece on your chest, Tom.

[+ BOZO T CLOWN]

agreed. "repulsive" "detest" "hate" "disfigure" "irrational"—when we make the mistake of thinking that our own erotic tastes/desires are "normal," and that people who think/behave differently are somehow irrational or insecure, doing detestable, hateful, repulsive, things that disqualify them as sexual partners... wow. how is that really different from what straight people did to their erotic others for centuries? maybe people with tattoos should be burned at the stake? lobotomized? imprisoned?

this kind of commentary does a real disservice to the gay community for several reasons. first, because it polices other people's desires—"ish. yuck. you're into THAT? that's sick. disgusting. revolting." it demands erotic conformity to ultra-narrow definitions. that's immature. second, when you think this way, you close down the possibilities in your own erotic development and future. rather than position yourself against the possibility that you might ever find someone with tattoos attractive, isn't the better option to be open to the possibility that you might find one more thing in this world beautiful, hot, and desirable? I overcame my distaste for tattoos in kind of the same way I overcame my dislike for Indian and Chinese food—I grew up.

 

I would expect to hear this kind of narrow-minded, erotophobic conversation in the sunday school classroom of a southern baptist church, where it would be at home. I'm kind of appalled to find it here.

 

I don't understand how a dislike or disgust of tattoos is a disservice to the gay community. The title of this thread is "Escorts and tattoos". If/when I hire, I want the escort to be handsome and well-built. For me and many others, tattoos are a desecration of the human body. It's akin to throwing paint on the Mona Lisa. There are thousands of escorts, and I simply will not hire any that have graffiti on their body, no matter how beautiful they are. Tom Isern, as an escort, when you made the decision to put ink on your body, you discarded a significant portion of your client base. Like it or not, that is a fact. A fact that you as an escort must deal with.

 

Bozo

[Rudynate]

Tom Isern, as an escort, when you made the decision to put ink on your body, you discarded a significant portion of your client base.

 

There are thousands of escorts, and I simply will not hire any that have graffiti on their body, no matter how beautiful they are. Tom Isern, as an escort, when you made the decision to put ink on your body, you discarded a significant portion of your client base. Like it or not, that is a fact. A fact that you as an escort must deal with.

 

 

So there, Tom Isern, take that!! The nerve, getting a tattoo!!

 

You're right, he might have lost some market share. He doesn't seem to be losing any sleep over it, though. But, he may well have acquired a greater potential market in getting the tattoo than he lost.

 

It's interesting, the tattoo hand-wringers are always speculating whether the horrible tattoo scourge is finally at an end. And someone always volunteers that he sees signs that it is coming to an end.

 

A fertile new area of employment law is workplace accommodation for those with body modifications - e.g. piercing and tattoos. So, rather than being close to an end, it seems that body modification is on the way to becoming an institution.

[Guest RexB]

So, rather than being close to an end, it seems that body modification is on the way to becoming an institution.

 

Been there, done that. Tattooing already was institutionalized once in history. Every inmate in the Nazi concentration camps was tattooed when they were processed upon entrance.

[Rudynate]

Been there, done that. Tattooing already was institutionalized once in history. Every inmate in the Nazi concentration camps was tattooed when they were processed upon entrance.

 

The Nazi card. This thread has officially jumped the shark.

[hekilio]

agreed. "repulsive" "detest" "hate" "disfigure" "irrational"—when we make the mistake of thinking that our own erotic tastes/desires are "normal," and that people who think/behave differently are somehow irrational or insecure, doing detestable, hateful, repulsive, things that disqualify them as sexual partners... wow. how is that really different from what straight people did to their erotic others for centuries? maybe people with tattoos should be burned at the stake? lobotomized? imprisoned?

 

this kind of commentary does a real disservice to the gay community for several reasons. first, because it polices other people's desires—"ish. yuck. you're into THAT? that's sick. disgusting. revolting." it demands erotic conformity to ultra-narrow definitions. that's immature. second, when you think this way, you close down the possibilities in your own erotic development and future. rather than position yourself against the possibility that you might ever find someone with tattoos attractive, isn't the better option to be open to the possibility that you might find one more thing in this world beautiful, hot, and desirable? I overcame my distaste for tattoos in kind of the same way I overcame my dislike for Indian and Chinese food—I grew up.

 

I would expect to hear this kind of narrow-minded, erotophobic conversation in the sunday school classroom of a southern baptist church, where it would be at home. I'm kind of appalled to find it here.

 

I absolutely agree. Anyone who dislikes tattoos is a bad gay. I love tattoos on guys therefore I am a good gay!

[killianjamesnyc]

Reading this thread is very interesting. I can't fathom how people don't realize that their opinion is most powerful to themselves, and most of the time irrelevant to other people. Tattoos look amazing on some people and just horrible on others. It's how the ink contours the body that's sexy. I don't think INK alone is sexy. It's like clothes. A suit can look amazing on one person because they fill it out beautifully and horrible on someone else.