Skip to main content

Body Art: Your Tattoos Are Problematic


Liz. Wolfe, in her article “Your tattoos are problematic” published in Reason Foundation on March 10, 2018, discusses why she thinks tattoos are problematic from different aspects of this issue.

Wolfe discusses the history and origins of tattooing, it relates with many cultures.  Asia was one of the first regions where tattooing was common.  In Japan Tattoos were associated with criminals and certain types of merchants, it was outlawed for many years but was made legal again in 1948.  In Mexico tattoos were used to honor a relative who died. “About 90% of sailors in the 19th century sported tattoos” says Wolfe. Most were nautical in theme, but some sailors adorned themselves with Hula girls or “pin up girls to remind them of ladies back home.”  Sailors traveling around the world was one method the art of tattooing spread. Some societies honored them while some societies shunned tattoos. Twenty years ago, body art became more acceptable in America.  In 1993 the magazine Playboy debuted its first tattoo on one of its playmates.  Even the toy company Mattel “released an “inked” Barbie Doll in 2011.”  Wolfe said that body art comes in many shapes, sizes, and colors.  People sometimes wait for long periods of time before deciding what tattoo to have because they do not want risk regretting their decision.  One person received a Tasmanian Devil tattoo to honor the death of his father, who years before also had a Tasmanian Devil tattoo to honor his father.  
Wolfe also discusses some of the political issues about tattoos. Many activists expressed opposition to tattoos that “steal” images from native cultures.  Wolfe calls this “Cultural appropriation.”  She says that “Some popular tattoos have historical lineages so tangled it’s hard to tell who is appropriating whose heritage.” Quoting Salman Rusdie who said, “The idea of the sacred … seeks to turn other ideas … into crimes.” Wolfe argues that prohibiting replicating an idea misses the mark.  She states activists fail to see that replicating art from other cultures preserves it for the future. She suggests that tattoos are art and should be protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects the right of free speech.  She is concerned the courts may rule on what can be tattooed and what cannot be tattooed, and whether tattoos are art and thereby considered a free speech protected by the first amendment.  
Tattoos like any art form are subject to the likes and dislikes of the individual.  I personally do not like tattoos. In my opinion and from articles I have read, tattoos are sometimes associated with bad people and criminals.  But while I am personally opposed to tattoos I know people who do get them and who are not bad people or a criminal.  And like any piece of art, some I like and some I do not like.  It just like any other artist, a tattoo artist should be required to tattoo someone or something he or she finds against her beliefs.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Native American Boarding School: DESTROYING a Culture

Bickford-Duane, Pauline , in his article “ DESTROYING a Culture ” published in the magazine Cobblestone on Jan 2015, discusses about how US Government took land and broke treaties with Native Americans.  Then they tried to make them like white people, But later US Government learned that was a bad idea.  So, they gave Native Americans back a lot of rights such as the ability to governed themselves, attend their own schools, and learn their language. Photographs from the Carlisle Indian School show a group of Sioux boys shortly after their arrival at the school (ABOVE) and a group of “assimilated” Sioux students (OPPOSITE). The author first wrote a short history of how the United States government tried to take over Native American culture. She said the government had tried for almost 100 years and over 400 agreements to find a “solution” to the Native American “problem”. But most of them were not successful. then in the late 1800s, Senator Dawes proposed a solution. Th

China’s One-Child Policy: A Solution or a Problem

            Susan Scutti, in her article “ One Child Policy is One Big Problem for China ” published in Newsweek Global on January 24, 2014, discusses the thirty-five years of China’s official policy regarding of female infanticide and the primary reason for the government making this law.   From 1949 to 1979, the year this law was started, China’s population grew from 542 million to 975 million.   With an increase in birth rates the government was concerned there would be insufficient resources if its population continued to increase.               China has a long-standing cultural bias against females.   Males are expected to take care of elderly parents so parents desire male babies.   There are stories of parents killing female babies. Even in 2005 the government continued this official anti-female bias by associating female babies with disabled babies as a reason to allow a second child.   According to Scutti, “This pairing of ‘girl’ and ‘disabled’ is hardly an accident.  

My American dream

Life can be very difficult, education gives hope my life will be better, education can help a person through the hard times. Sometimes the most worthwhile things in life can take a long time and can be very hard to find in the end. But, Education can make a difference in life. I was born in an education family where both my parents were teachers in China.   When my sisters and I were lazy about school, they always told us that we are lucky to enjoy a good education. My parents grew up in the early days of a new China. In the 1960s, there was a movement in China called "the Cultural Revolution," which is about the educated urban youth going to work in the countryside or mountain areas. They thought that labor was a greater honor than education, so during those hard years schools were closed. A ll the young students responded to the party's call to work in rural areas. The slogan, "the most glorious work," encouraged people in the cities to work in rural area