Board index › General Discussion › General Autism Discussion

Tattoos: Aspies Love 'Em or Leave 'Em?

Page 5 of 9 [ 132 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Tattoos: love 'em, or leave 'em,?
I like tattoos but I can't handle pain. 6%  6%  [ 6 ]
The whole point of tattoos in Western society escapes me. 50%  50%  [ 50 ]
I ignore/don't notice them. 11%  11%  [ 11 ]
Tattoos are awesome and I have one or more. 33%  33%  [ 33 ]
Total votes : 100

hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

03 Sep 2012, 11:07 am

matt wrote:
Without considering that others would see a tattoo what would be the point of getting it?


For yourself? For the same reasons you might get attractive undergarments when no one will see them, or shave parts of your body when no one will see them?



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

03 Sep 2012, 11:15 am

matt wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
matt wrote:
I think that it would be odd for me to want to have a tattoo, because tattoos are inherently sociable, in that their purpose is for others to look at.


No, they're not.
Without considering that others would see a tattoo what would be the point of getting it?


I've already outlined my "reasons" for getting them. They were not "inherently social."

Quote:
I don't understand. I expressed an opinion, that untattooed skin looks better, and that without it I don't feel like I can ever see a person's real skin.

If you prefer to have tattoos or you prefer that people not perceive your skin, that is fine. That's just not what I prefer.


And I asked you a question.

Why would I want to do such an "inherently social" thing like showing my nakedness to others just so they will find it attractive?


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


matt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 917

03 Sep 2012, 11:21 am

hanyo wrote:
matt wrote:
Without considering that others would see a tattoo what would be the point of getting it?


For yourself? For the same reasons you might get attractive undergarments when no one will see them, or shave parts of your body when no one will see them?
Why would you consider undergarments attractive without first considering other people's perceptions?



matt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 917

03 Sep 2012, 11:26 am

XFilesGeek wrote:
Quote:
I don't understand. I expressed an opinion, that untattooed skin looks better, and that without it I don't feel like I can ever see a person's real skin.

If you prefer to have tattoos or you prefer that people not perceive your skin, that is fine. That's just not what I prefer.


And I asked you a question.

Why would I want to do such an "inherently social" thing like showing my nakedness to others just so they will find it attractive?
I already said that I don't understand your question.

I never said that my preferences should influence your decisions about what you do to or with your own body. I just stated what was my opinion, as the topic title asked.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

03 Sep 2012, 11:27 am

matt wrote:
hanyo wrote:
matt wrote:
Without considering that others would see a tattoo what would be the point of getting it?


For yourself? For the same reasons you might get attractive undergarments when no one will see them, or shave parts of your body when no one will see them?
Why would you consider undergarments attractive without first considering other people's perceptions?


We can't decide if something is "attractive" to ourselves without considering other people's opinions?

Can I decide if something tastes good without considering other people's opinions?

Can I decide if an activity is "fun" without considering other people's opinions.

I don't consider other people's opinions much at all; hence "Aspergers Disorder."


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

03 Sep 2012, 11:31 am

matt wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
Quote:
I don't understand. I expressed an opinion, that untattooed skin looks better, and that without it I don't feel like I can ever see a person's real skin.

If you prefer to have tattoos or you prefer that people not perceive your skin, that is fine. That's just not what I prefer.


And I asked you a question.

Why would I want to do such an "inherently social" thing like showing my nakedness to others just so they will find it attractive?
I already said that I don't understand your question.

I never said that my preferences should influence your decisions about what you do to or with your own body. I just stated what was my opinion, as the topic title asked.


I never said that your preferences should influence my decisions. You posted an opinion on a public message board, and I responded with a question. That's how it works.

Why are tattoos "inherently social," but preserving your "nakedness" in order to be attractive to others is somehow not?


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

03 Sep 2012, 11:31 am

matt wrote:
Why would you consider undergarments attractive without first considering other people's perceptions?


I don't know what you mean and I don't consider others perceptions.

Whether I choose plain white granny panties or a lacy sexy thong or that Wonder Woman underwear set I saw in Spencer's (I had Wonder Woman underoos in grade school that were similar) I'm the only one that sees them.

Actually I don't wear underwear unless I have to but that's not the point. The point is their looks are for my eye only but that doesn't mean I just pick the plainest I can find.



matt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 917

03 Sep 2012, 11:48 am

XFilesGeek wrote:
matt wrote:
hanyo wrote:
matt wrote:
Without considering that others would see a tattoo what would be the point of getting it?


For yourself? For the same reasons you might get attractive undergarments when no one will see them, or shave parts of your body when no one will see them?
Why would you consider undergarments attractive without first considering other people's perceptions?


We can't decide if something is "attractive" to ourselves without considering other people's opinions?

Can I decide if something tastes good without considering other people's opinions?

Can I decide if an activity is "fun" without considering other people's opinions.

I don't consider other people's opinions much at all; hence "Aspergers Disorder."
If I just choose something because I like it or because it looks nice that has nothing to do with whether I think that it's "attractive".

I can like the way that something looks or like the way that it feels, but if I am considering something attractive it would be because I'm considering a possibility of some kind of attraction, implying that there is something to attract. That is a consideration involving other people.



hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

03 Sep 2012, 11:53 am

matt wrote:
If I just choose something because I like it or because it looks nice that has nothing to do with whether I think that it's "attractive".

I can like the way that something looks or like the way that it feels, but if I am considering something attractive it would be because I'm considering a possibility of some kind of attraction, implying that there is something to attract. That is a consideration involving other people.


Then maybe I'm wording things wrong because I don't consider other people.

You can like something and think it's attractive without wanting to use it to attract and you can like something sexy even if you don't have sex.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

03 Sep 2012, 11:59 am

matt wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
matt wrote:
hanyo wrote:
matt wrote:
Without considering that others would see a tattoo what would be the point of getting it?


For yourself? For the same reasons you might get attractive undergarments when no one will see them, or shave parts of your body when no one will see them?
Why would you consider undergarments attractive without first considering other people's perceptions?


We can't decide if something is "attractive" to ourselves without considering other people's opinions?

Can I decide if something tastes good without considering other people's opinions?

Can I decide if an activity is "fun" without considering other people's opinions.

I don't consider other people's opinions much at all; hence "Aspergers Disorder."
If I just choose something because I like it or because it looks nice that has nothing to do with whether I think that it's "attractive".

I can like the way that something looks or like the way that it feels, but if I am considering something attractive it would be because I'm considering a possibility of some kind of attraction, implying that there is something to attract. That is a consideration involving other people.


No, it isn't.

I can decide if something is "attractive/pretty/aesthetically pleasing" all without considering the opinions of others.

Something only has to be "attractive" to me. The giant wooden bear head I have hanging on my wall is "attractive" to me. It does not have to be "attractive" to others in order to be "attractive" to me.

P.S. This still has nothing to do with whether tattoos are "inherently social."


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


matt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 917

03 Sep 2012, 12:04 pm

Without that something to attract, whatever would be considered "attractive" is just "appealing" or "nice".

"Attractive" inherently implies that there is something to attract, and implies a consideration of the fact that others have an opinion.

Tattoos are inherently sociable because if no one sees them then they have no point in being.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

03 Sep 2012, 12:08 pm

matt wrote:
Without that something to attract, whatever would be considered "attractive" is just "appealing" or "nice".

"Attractive" inherently implies that there is something to attract, and implies a consideration of the fact that others have an opinion.


No, it doesn't. I am the only person who is required to be "attracted" to something in order for it to be "attractive."

Something being "attractive" to me does not require it to be "attractive" to others.

Quote:
Tattoos are inherently sociable because if no one sees them then they have no point in being.


Tattoos are not inherently social. My reasons for getting tattoos have nothing to do with being "social."


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

03 Sep 2012, 12:10 pm

matt wrote:
Without that something to attract, whatever would be considered "attractive" is just "appealing" or "nice".

"Attractive" inherently implies that there is something to attract, and implies a consideration of the fact that others have an opinion.

Tattoos are inherently sociable because if no one sees them then they have no point in being.


I think we are arguing over word definitions as for me attractive means the same thing as looks nice, just better.

I have tattoos and no one sees them. If I got any more they either would only show part of the time or not at all. I don't expose much skin.

People can get a tattoo just because they think it looks nice.



matt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 917

03 Sep 2012, 12:19 pm

XFilesGeek wrote:
matt wrote:
Without that something to attract, whatever would be considered "attractive" is just "appealing" or "nice".

"Attractive" inherently implies that there is something to attract, and implies a consideration of the fact that others have an opinion.


No, it doesn't. I am the only person who is required to be "attracted" to something in order for it to be "attractive."

Something being "attractive" to me does not require it to be "attractive" to others.
Something may be "attractive" to you regardless of whether others find it attractive, but "attractive" implies that there is something which may be attracted. The use of "attractive" implies awareness of others' opinions. Otherwise, whatever is being called "attractive" would just be called "pleasant" or "appealing" or "nice".

XFilesGeek wrote:
Quote:
Tattoos are inherently sociable because if no one sees them then they have no point in being.


Tattoos are not inherently social. My reasons for getting tattoos have nothing to do with being "social."
I never said that your reasons for getting a tattoo had to do with being "social". I said that tattoos themselves are inherently sociable. Without the consideration either that others were self-decorating or that self-decorating might be perceived by others, no one would have a reason to ever consider getting a tattoo. If you have a tattoo that no one ever sees, it has no point in being there.



hanyo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Sep 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,302

03 Sep 2012, 12:23 pm

matt wrote:
Something may be "attractive" to you regardless of whether others find it attractive, but "attractive" implies that there is something which may be attracted. The use of "attractive" implies awareness of others' opinions. Otherwise, whatever is being called "attractive" would just be called "pleasant" or "appealing" or "nice".


To me those words mean the same thing.

matt wrote:
Without the consideration either that others were self-decorating or that self-decorating might be perceived by others, no one would have a reason to ever consider getting a tattoo. If you have a tattoo that no one ever sees, it has no point in being there.


I have tattoos that no one ever sees and if I get more people won't see them either.



socialistprincess
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2012
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 1
Location: United Kingdom

03 Sep 2012, 1:23 pm

I like tattoos as long as they are tasteful and and are not covering the entire body, although I don't understand the constant need for people to get tattoos purely because they want to be a rebel or be 'unique' since everyone and their mother has a tattoo nowadays.