Misogynists hate, hate, hate it when women get tattoos. They just can’t all agree on why. The standard misogynist line on tattoos for women is that they are all, essentially, “tramp stamps” – a way of broadcasting that the woman displaying them is a slut, a skank, a whore. You know the drill.
But the “alternative right” racist/sexist/homophobe who goes by the handle agnostic has a rather different take. In a post on his blog Face to Face, he argues that women with tattoos are actually trying to broadcast their Puritan prudery.
Tattoos, you see, are just plain ugly, and help to accessorize a dreary look designed to repel men.
Notice how those girls dress in drab, dark monochrome colors, wear no girly jewelry, and sport flat hair rather than Big Hair. Their sassy, sarcastic, even nasty attitude echos their off-putting look.
Fundamentally, they are part of the larger trend toward drab dressing, and its signal of reluctance to get loose. Their personalities are more anti-social, so they express the neo-Pilgrim style in a more antagonistic fashion than the less abrasive girls in their generation, but they’re both variations on the same theme.
The tattoo-bearers are likely to be man-haters as well.
They are also part of the larger trend among women toward fear of or hatred toward men. …
In such a climate, women will alter their appearance and demeanor in order to deflate rather than excite the male libido. They act like prey trying to give warning signals to potential predators. The tattoo chicks are only the extreme version of this widespread trend. Girls sure don’t look or act as cute and flirty as they used to in the boy-crazy Eighties, when they thought of guys not as predators but as conspecifics who they wanted to court with engaging mating displays.
“Conspecifics” simply means “members of the same species.” Agnostic loves to drop that sciency lingo in order to make his prejudices seem smart.
Anyway, he continues by arguing that tattoos are especially offensive to pickup artistes and other “assertive” dudes.
Off-putting style also serves to filter out the more assertive and independent males, who would rather spend time on a girl who looks cute, rather than settle for one who’s all marked up or not willing to show anything at all. … By inking themselves up, girls ensure that only the guys who are willing to get walked over and slapped in the face will approach them. Why go through the long hassle of having your new boyfriend fixed when you can advertise that only the neutered need apply in the first place?
Ah, but this last bit is perhaps more revealing than agnostic means it to be. Tattoos are an affront to misogynists because they’re seen as too assertive, too masculine – a challenge to traditional femininity, and to men who prefer traditionally feminine women.
Tattoos on women make misogynistic men angry because on some fundamental level these men don’t think women have the right to decorate their bodies in a way that displeases men –or at least their kind of men. It’s the same kind of creepy, possessive anger that many misogynistic men show towards women who cut their hair short. It’s as if these men on some level believe women’s bodies belong to them, and not to the women themselves.
And that’s pretty unattractive.
I’m still boggled that a freakin’ EUROPEAN would act like the whole fucking continent is the same. Or that they have any similarities besides being in a continent.
Oh, oh, is Eastern Russia European or Asian?
Both? Technically I guess the dividing line is supposed to be the Bosphorus Straits, so start there and draw a line due north.
Moscow and Kiev, however, are definitely in Europe. Go talk to women who live there about how totally woman-friendly and un-misogynistic the culture they live in is, and how non-macho the men are. Try not to cry when they laugh at you.
Well, I was born in North America, so obviously I know about masculinity on my damn continent.
I can also tell you about the personal food preferences of mammals too. All of them. Because I’m a mammal.
@weirdwoodtreehugger
Wanted to jump in on the bandwagon here in re American politics. I’ve been reading a lot by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt. He came up with Moral Foundations Theory which identifies 6 moral foundations wherein those who identify as liberal mostly apply 3 to their lives, opinions, ideas whereas those who identify as conservative use all 6 foundations with an emphasis on the other 3 that liberals do not use all that much. I posted link but also provided the 6 foundations below, and I think it’s obvious which foundations adhere to liberals/conservatives. I apply this theory a lot when thinking about American politics because it really holds true. This theory can even be used to explain why studies continue to conclude that people who watch Fox News are less informed, or why conservatives readily support bills that are unconstitutional on its face.
http://www.moralfoundations.org/
There are some really interesting publications on the link, primarily about politics as that is what Haidt applies his theory to. The one I continue to go back to is “What Makes People Vote Republican” which concludes that people who identify as conservative are more prone to accept lies, however blatant they may be, so long as they feel they are on the “right” side of the issue based on how they use all 6 moral foundations though the obvious ones are emphasized more.
1) Care/harm
2) Fairness/cheating
3) Loyalty/betrayal
4) Authority/subversion
5) Sanctity/degradation
6) Liberty/oppression
I recently read about a study which tried to measure the different ways in which liberals’ and conservatives’ brains react to gross stimuli. Their brains were hooked up to a machine to determine brain wave reaction when showed a variety of images. Conservatives had immediate and visceral reactions to any picture that neared on something disgusting, whereas the liberal brain had a slower response to disgusting stimuli. Moral Foundations totally applies here because they are more likely to have a higher sense of appeal to authority and sanctity (imo mostly as a result of religion). This also speaks to all the idiotic comments that conservatives tend to make about LGBT anything, because all they are really thinking about when they hear a topic like gay marriage, is butt fucking. Not to be crude, just trying to prove a point, because that is how they see it, which to them is inherently gross, again, because of the conservative mindset.
What else can explain why people who identify as conservative are willing to believe the dumbest shit imaginable since the first election of Obama? It is literally because they do not care about the truth so long as they feel their group membership is still intact because they believe the “right” thing. That is why so many of them support completely unconstitutional laws because that desire to be part of the “right” group overrides common sense and reasoned thinking. I mean Benghazi, IRS, Fast and Furious, (what else? isn’t this list endless?) pretty much most criticism of Obama and Michelle (who, by any objective standard, is one of the best FLOTUS we’ve ever had), and so on and so forth. Now I certainly don’t like everything that Obama has done, not even close, but all those fake scandals that people really believe are true when there is no evidence of same just serves to show the rest of us how little so many Americans understand about how government works. And how can we educate the unwilling, I mean, they’re even against public education, wtf ya know?!?!
Ok, i ramble about politics, my favorite topic, me stop now. Annnnnd….breathe.
@enhancedvibes
MFT is interesting, but I’m iffy about whether a moralistic theory of politics is sufficient for political analysis. I’d lean towards no, personally.
I used to be scared of tattooed women too. Now that I’ve been with a few tattooed women, and have a lot of friends with tattoos, I know they’re just normal women who happens to have tattooed. Anyone who is scared of them is being immature.
I dunno why people are down on the ’80s. I for one can’t wait for the return of kangols, sweatsuits and rope chains!
Personally, I like women with tattoos.
That’s nice, dear
Jordan, thanks for the Boner Note. Run along now.
Men’s fashion is always easier. We had poofy skirts, neon colors, shoulder pads, peplums and all sorts of other restrictive shit. Women’s clothing in the 80s was pretty infantile.
“just normal women”?
“scared of them”?
If you’re here in good faith, you might want to think about what is offensive in your post, apologise for it once you’ve worked it out, and try that entrance again.
If my tattoos and fat are off putting to misogynistic, Alpha males… good. 🙂
personally, I avoid to date a girl with tattoo.. but then I met this fine young lady in school. we talked and ate very often till we had a relationship. we had i great time and I found a little heart tattoo on her left hip.. so I guess I don’t fear girls with tattoo..
but girls with huge tattoos… I think they are ‘more masculine’ than me and it intimidates me a lot but not fear.
What is it with the boner updates on this thread?
What is it with all the boner updates on the entire internet?
Boners are the Most Important Thing.
I see your boner updates, and raise you a brand new ink update. Try not to get too intimidated: https://twitter.com/tinyorc/status/479720234870648832
Stunning ink, @tinyorc.
Well that’s just gorgeous.
Oh that is an awesome tat.
It’s a librarian owl?
I’m still confused by the “tattoos are masculine” thing. I mean, maybe if they’re intentionally scary Yakuza-style demon faces or something? I’m having a hard time figuring out how anyone could look at, say, a butterfly on someone’s neck, or a line of text, and read it as super mega macho.
I guess sometimes it depends on where the tattoo is. I have my upper arms tattooed and have been told by many people that they don’t like the placement because it seems masculine. My dad is a pretty liberal dude and he even said that I would be prettier without tattoos.
That’s a gorgeous owl tat.