How Young Is Too Young for Tattoos?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2015 4:16 PM GMT
    31TATSA-master675.jpg

    NYT: In a storefront parlor on Bergen Street in Boerum Hill, Brooklyn, a father of two sat in a chair one recent Saturday afternoon, his shirt hiked over his head to reveal an open expanse of shoulder to be tattooed.

    His two children, well under 10 years old, were yelping away beside him. They weren’t there to watch. They had gone first.

    Such is the normal course of affairs at Tattly, the four-year-old temporary-tattoo company.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/fashion/a-temporary-tattoo-parlor-with-ink-for-the-whole-family.html?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2015 4:30 PM GMT
    I think anything under 18 us too young. This is something parents should not be allowed to consent to because tattoos are permanent. Tattoo removal is painful and can leave scars so it's something only consenting adults should be able to choose for themselves.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Dec 31, 2015 4:41 PM GMT
    MrFuscle saidI think anything under 18 us too young. This is something parents should not be allowed to consent to because tattoos are permanent. Tattoo removal is painful and can leave scars so it's something only consenting adults should be able to choose for themselves.

    At risk of derailing the thread, I think this comment could also be applied to the issue of male circumcision. I'm presently frustrated with my sister, who is a new mom. Her wife and she just had a baby boy, and as a paranoid young couple they are extremely overprotective, won't get him his shots because they're wary of the side effects, won't take him to large family gatherings because they don't won't him to get sick, yet disfigured his dick within 48 hours of his birth, despite my advising against it. I've not confronted them on it. It's too late now. But it actually infuriates me that they think it's okay to protect everything but his penis. They're not even religious. They're just ignorant, despite being college educated and otherwise sophisticated.
  • jeepguySD

    Posts: 651

    Dec 31, 2015 6:27 PM GMT
    My attitudes, priorities, and my likes (sometimes even obsessions) have been in a state of flux my whole life. I have no tattoos, but have considered getting one. I am glad that I didn't because I know that today I would regret having the tattoo that I was considering at the time. Children are far too young to decide whether to get a tattoo, what it should be, or where to put it. I see the age of consent in this question as being subjective, depending on the emotional and intellectual maturity of the individual, and his/her ability to pay for it.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Dec 31, 2015 6:29 PM GMT
    desertmuscl said
    HottJoe said
    MrFuscle saidI think anything under 18 us too young. This is something parents should not be allowed to consent to because tattoos are permanent. Tattoo removal is painful and can leave scars so it's something only consenting adults should be able to choose for themselves.

    At risk of derailing the thread, I think this comment could also be applied to the issue of male circumcision. I'm presently frustrated with my sister, who is a new mom. Her wife and she just had a baby boy, and as a paranoid young couple they are extremely overprotective, won't get him his shots because they're wary of the side effects, won't take him to large family gatherings because they don't won't him to get sick, yet disfigured his dick within 48 hours of his birth, despite my advising against it. I've not confronted them on it. It's too late now. But it actually infuriates me that they think it's okay to protect everything but his penis. They're not even religious. They're just ignorant, despite being college educated and otherwise sophisticated.


    Circumcision is still widely done in the US as far as I know. It has nothing to do with religion. I was spared fortunately and am thankful.

    I wish I had been able to choose for myself.icon_confused.gif

    Why do you defend the practice, especially being that you're grateful to have been spared from the humiliation?
  • Bunjamon

    Posts: 3161

    Dec 31, 2015 6:36 PM GMT
    I think 18 is an appropriate age to get a tattoo, just as I think 18 is an appropriate age to drink alcohol (you're a legal adult, after all).

    This article, though, is about a temporary tattoo parlor. I think it's a cute idea, since kids love that kind of thing, and a fun way for different generations to bond.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Dec 31, 2015 6:41 PM GMT
    desertmuscl said
    HottJoe said
    desertmuscl said
    HottJoe said
    MrFuscle saidI think anything under 18 us too young. This is something parents should not be allowed to consent to because tattoos are permanent. Tattoo removal is painful and can leave scars so it's something only consenting adults should be able to choose for themselves.

    At risk of derailing the thread, I think this comment could also be applied to the issue of male circumcision. I'm presently frustrated with my sister, who is a new mom. Her wife and she just had a baby boy, and as a paranoid young couple they are extremely overprotective, won't get him his shots because they're wary of the side effects, won't take him to large family gatherings because they don't won't him to get sick, yet disfigured his dick within 48 hours of his birth, despite my advising against it. I've not confronted them on it. It's too late now. But it actually infuriates me that they think it's okay to protect everything but his penis. They're not even religious. They're just ignorant, despite being college educated and otherwise sophisticated.


    Circumcision is still widely done in the US as far as I know. It has nothing to do with religion. I was spared fortunately and am thankful.

    I wish I had been able to choose for myself.icon_confused.gif

    Why do you defend the practice, especially being that you're grateful to have been spared from the humiliation?


    I did not defend the practice. I merely stated that it is widely done in the US.


    So, you're just stating the obvious???

    You come off as argumentative/partisan whenever you quote me. Not sure how else I'm supposed to take it.
  • venue35

    Posts: 4644

    Dec 31, 2015 7:46 PM GMT
    I got cut 5 years ago i don't feel disfigured i like it better actually. People still lick my weenie like before
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Dec 31, 2015 8:11 PM GMT
    venue35 saidI got cut 5 years ago i don't feel disfigured i like it better actually. People still lick my weenie

    Some people would consider tattoos to be disfiguring, while others would consider them to be beautiful. You chose to have the procedure, so of course it's gonna be what you want. But to do it to a baby is, imo, more invasive than tattooing a baby. A tattoo can be removed, after all.

    Personally, I don't feel disfigured, but I definitely feel robbed. I would've wanted to know what it's like to be intact.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2015 8:33 PM GMT
    75 is too young.
  • jjguy05

    Posts: 459

    Jan 01, 2016 7:35 AM GMT
    This article is about temporary tattoos.

    Non-issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2016 10:30 AM GMT
    In vitro. I draw the line at the womb. No in vitro tattooing!
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Jan 01, 2016 5:47 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    Why do you defend the practice, especially being that you're grateful to have been spared from the humiliation?


    What humiliation? I'm circumcised and I have absolutely no recollection of it whatsoever. I think this is one of the reasons it's done soon after birth as it's less painful and traumatic. I think assuming people who were circumcised went through some sort of humiliation is, in itself, kind of ignorant.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Jan 01, 2016 5:48 PM GMT
    mickeytopogigio said75 is too young.


    How about 120 is too young
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jan 01, 2016 6:07 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    HottJoe said
    Why do you defend the practice, especially being that you're grateful to have been spared from the humiliation?


    What humiliation? I'm circumcised and I have absolutely no recollection of it whatsoever. I think this is one of the reasons it's done soon after birth as it's less painful and traumatic. I think assuming people who were circumcised went through some sort of humiliation is, in itself, kind of ignorant.

    You're just too ignorant to realize that it's barbaric to have society erroneously deem that males shouldn't have a natural penis and need part of their penis sliced off at birth. It's really disturbing to cut pieces of flesh off of babies, and humiliating to consider most men on earth don't undergo genital mutilation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2016 6:13 PM GMT
    tattoos and unusual piercings should be left for those 18 and over who may be mature enough to understand what they mean and decide if they want to have it on their body.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Jan 01, 2016 6:36 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    HottJoe said
    Why do you defend the practice, especially being that you're grateful to have been spared from the humiliation?


    What humiliation? I'm circumcised and I have absolutely no recollection of it whatsoever. I think this is one of the reasons it's done soon after birth as it's less painful and traumatic. I think assuming people who were circumcised went through some sort of humiliation is, in itself, kind of ignorant.

    You're just too ignorant to realize that it's barbaric to have society erroneously deem that males shouldn't have a natural penis and need part of their penis sliced off at birth. It's really disturbing to cut pieces of flesh off of babies, and humiliating to consider most men on earth don't undergo genital mutilation.



    I don't think "ignorance" is really a fair way to define it. I'm merely making the point that, as someone who was circumsised as an infant, I have no remembrance of it whatsoever, nor do I feel any sort of "humiliation" at all. I'd be interested in hearing from others who are circumsised if they have any trauma or humiliation from having it done. I actually know a few guys who were humiliated that they were not circumsised and were actually circumsised as adults. At any rate, calling it "barbaric" is, in my opinion, kind of an extreme way to define circumsision as it's a widely used practice here and in other countries. You, obviously, don't know anything different, so you are speaking from your own life experience --- as am I.
  • jjguy05

    Posts: 459

    Jan 01, 2016 7:02 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidI actually know a few guys who were humiliated that they were not circumsised and were actually circumsised as adults.


    You realize most of the world doesn't circumcise, right?

    Only Americans, Koreans, Jews, Muslims, and some Africans do. It's culture-specific.
  • jjguy05

    Posts: 459

    Jan 01, 2016 7:04 PM GMT
    All this debate over TEMPORARY KID TATTOOS which have been around FOR A LONG TIME.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Jan 01, 2016 7:24 PM GMT
    jjguy05 said
    CuriousJockAZ saidI actually know a few guys who were humiliated that they were not circumsised and were actually circumsised as adults.


    You realize most of the world doesn't circumcise, right?

    Only Americans, Koreans, Jews, Muslims, and some Africans do. It's culture-specific.


    Yes, I realize it is a cultural (and sometimes a religious) thing, but that does not necessarily categorize it as "barbaric"
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    Jan 01, 2016 11:37 PM GMT
    Bunjamon saidI think 18 is an appropriate age to get a tattoo, just as I think 18 is an appropriate age to drink alcohol (you're a legal adult, after all).

    This article, though, is about a temporary tattoo parlor. I think it's a cute idea, since kids love that kind of thing, and a fun way for different generations to bond.
    18 is the beginning of adulthood and it is an appropriate age to do anything with the unfortunate exception of drinking and recreational marijuana use. The drinking age and minimum age for recreational marijuana should be 25. Today's 18-24 year olds are too immature and flaky to be allowed to get drunk and stoned. Horribly sad but true.
  • BAHBAA

    Posts: 122

    Jan 01, 2016 11:42 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    HottJoe said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    HottJoe said
    Why do you defend the practice, especially being that you're grateful to have been spared from the humiliation?


    What humiliation? I'm circumcised and I have absolutely no recollection of it whatsoever. I think this is one of the reasons it's done soon after birth as it's less painful and traumatic. I think assuming people who were circumcised went through some sort of humiliation is, in itself, kind of ignorant.

    You're just too ignorant to realize that it's barbaric to have society erroneously deem that males shouldn't have a natural penis and need part of their penis sliced off at birth. It's really disturbing to cut pieces of flesh off of babies, and humiliating to consider most men on earth don't undergo genital mutilation.



    I don't think "ignorance" is really a fair way to define it. I'm merely making the point that, as someone who was circumsised as an infant, I have no remembrance of it whatsoever, nor do I feel any sort of "humiliation" at all. I'd be interested in hearing from others who are circumsised if they have any trauma or humiliation from having it done. I actually know a few guys who were humiliated that they were not circumsised and were actually circumsised as adults. At any rate, calling it "barbaric" is, in my opinion, kind of an extreme way to define circumsision as it's a widely used practice here and in other countries. You, obviously, don't know anything different, so you are speaking from your own life experience --- as am I.


    No humiliation whatsoever. To the contrary I am grateful everyday that I am.
  • Sincityfan

    Posts: 409

    Jan 02, 2016 12:35 AM GMT
    HottJoe said
    MrFuscle saidI think anything under 18 us too young. This is something parents should not be allowed to consent to because tattoos are permanent. Tattoo removal is painful and can leave scars so it's something only consenting adults should be able to choose for themselves.

    At risk of derailing the thread, I think this comment could also be applied to the issue of male circumcision. I'm presently frustrated with my sister, who is a new mom. Her wife and she just had a baby boy, and as a paranoid young couple they are extremely overprotective, won't get him his shots because they're wary of the side effects, won't take him to large family gatherings because they don't won't him to get sick, yet disfigured his dick within 48 hours of his birth, despite my advising against it. I've not confronted them on it. It's too late now. But it actually infuriates me that they think it's okay to protect everything but his penis. They're not even religious. They're just ignorant, despite being college educated and otherwise sophisticated.


    What did you expect? Bitches be crazy.

    mickeytopogigio said75 is too young.


    Not even on your death bed.
    tats are nasty. they make you look cheap.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 02, 2016 1:59 AM GMT
    jjguy05 saidThis article is about temporary tattoos.

    Non-issue.


    The article may be about temporary tattoos but that doesn't make the subject a non issue. A few years ago a Georgia woman got into legal trouble for allowing her 13 year old to get a tattoo.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 02, 2016 3:26 PM GMT
    To me nobody under 18 without parental permission.Nobody under 16 period.