Greyhound wrote:
I do not understand why anyone would want to permanently illustrate themselves. The more I think about it, the more bizzare it seems
In my own opinion, and through my observations, tattoos are a way of making a permanent statement. One of the most stereotypically common tattoos is: "Mother" or a lover's name. Its a way of making a statement that nothing can erase. Something that nothing can refute. Even in a way, a way around the idea of I.D.S.T. (If Destroyed Still True).
Gravestones for example. They are made so that the words engraved on them are immutable and will stand the test of time for at least as long as a great amount of time will allow. It's the same thing with tattoos. The only difference between gravestone engravings and tattoos is that the engravings is on unfeeling stone or marble and tattoos is ink injected into flesh. The idea that it is in a way mutilation is only incidental to the entire matter. It is acceptable to mark an inanimate piece of stone or marble, but not human flesh.
Some see them as a means to commemorate something. For example some sailors have a tattoo of the ship that they served on, or soldiers have tattoos of the unit/squad/service/etc. that they served with.
Myself for example if you look back you will see I have 2 biological tattoos. A heart because I think, speak and act from it, and a spine, to remind myself of my own personal self-fortitude. To remind me that I have my own mind and with that the right to use it. To stand up for myself when I feel under attack or when I have a point, and to not back down when I know I am right. In essence, to have a back-bone. And also due to my deep interest and fascination with biology, the spine itself is a symbol of strength and fortitude.
And in my own opinion, there is no better way to tribute myself, my mind, my heart and my soul than to place an immutable mark utilising an art form to tell the story of my strengths. The pain factor is merely a bi-product. A necessary evil in order to attain the mark. No pain, no gain. What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger.
I have these tattoos as a reminder and a tribute to myself and my faculties as I move forward in life I am given strength and meaning by the very psychological tools I possess.
I guess the one thing that most people who have something against tattoos is the pain factor incured while getting a tattoo, and that in doing so can be classed as self-mutilation. But if you follow self mutilation through to it's logical conclusion, then we are all self-mutilating whenever we walk out our front doors. We all do damage to our bodies by breathing our atmosphere, injesting chemicals, animals and plants and moving our bodies.
Only in a pure, sterile, but also fertile euphoric and eupotic existance could we ever be free of all the forms of self-mutilation.
We are all indebted to a relentless countown towards death, and the actions we take in life can in a lot of cases speed up that clock. So to count ourselves as above the idea of self-mutilation as something that's avoidable, well I believe that's just pure idiocy.
I hope this has answered your confusion and possibly enlightened you to the mentality encapsulating the idea of tattoos.
_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph