TooColdUlrick:
4) Bad Boy Hypothesis
at least a streak of it in him and if he got those tatts not to be "cool", but for a good reason.
As of this moment, I am hesitant of the Bad Boy Hypothesis. For the first reason that it is redundant to the other explanations and second because of the effect tattoos have on guys who most evidently are not bad asses. (However, the “at least a streak” might make up for the deficit.)
Undoubtedly, tattoos are a sexual fantasy and in the extreme it is termed
stigmatophilia, someone who needs their sexual partner to either be scarred, burned, pierced, or tattooed, in order to be aroused. In contemplating what might prompt tattoos to carry such a potent sexual exilir, even in normality, tattoos force us to look at the body moreso than we normally do. We look more specifically, we gaze longer. Karmasutra is exactly correct that passing glances morph into lingering stares.
Desdinova:
For women getting tattoos, I don't really get it either. Perhaps it has a link to fashion. Women love shopping for clothes. They love filling their closets with stuff they'll only wear a few times before it gets passed on. I almost have to wonder if tattoos have that same sort of appeal.
For myself, why women
get tattoos is no mystery. It’s all about a predisposition towards high risk behaviors. One thing I can agree about a link towards fashion is that women tend to limit themselves to small and sanitary tattoos—butterflies, stars, flowers—apparently to remain attractive to men. With due expection made to those few individuals who flaunt the social risk of potentially offending too many people with offending designs, no one wants to be shunned as a freak. Hence, women flirt with tattoos but rarely embody the full spirit of the pasttime.
RedPill:
In my experience, a woman’s attraction to body art seems to correlate with her economic background. It seems the women from poorer backgrounds, who also tend to be the ones with more mental issues and childhood/abuse issues, dig tattoos more than women who are from more affluent backgrounds. They also aren’t as judgmental, whereas women from more conservative, affluent backgrounds may see tats as a sign that the guy doesn’t have any sort of professional career ambitions.
I never thought about it from an economic perspective. I will definitely have to field test this one.
sapphire:
Several years ago, I wrote a thread concerning the subject of women and tatoos. I presented my own theory of why women get tatoos and offered my opinion that tattood women tend to be more sexually promiscuous. That sparked a huge debate and my thread ended up having close to 300 replies. My username at the time was Aurora. I tried searching, but it does not pop up for some reason.
In my memory, there have been two huge tattoo debates, yours and one by Sir_Chancealot. The underlining thesis in both was the same, of course, tattoos are the mark of sluts. I never engaged in the debates but I looked into the scientific research provided in the debates, and for good measure spent a few good months observing every woman I could who sported a tattoo. I was and years later am
still shocked by what tattoos overwhelmingly signify, not just in sexual inclinations but smoking, heavy drinking, or drugs.
If I may say, people often like to cite the current popularity of tattoos but I predict getting inked has reached its maximum popularity, which stands at roughly one out of five people. The social barriers in the United States against tattoos are non-existent except for cautionary advice and yet only a minority actually do it. Quite simply, tattoos will never be done by the majority because of the certain predispositions evidently true of the tattooed population despite the pasttime having gone mainstream. However, the naturally intriguing element of tattoos, the general fascination of the general public of tattoos on other people, I think is timeless and undying. But why, that’s the open question.
