shempmcgurk wrote: > I recently had an online discussion about tattoos and body modifications. My > contention was that it is okay to prejudge people by virtue of their tattoos > and body modifications. > > Skin color and beauty are things we have no control over and we should not, > of course, judge a person on those bases. But tattoos and body modifications > are done out of free choice and not only is it natural for us to make > judgements about people based on this visual observation, it is acceptable. > Why? Because these things are an expression of one's inner person. > > When I made this observation it was suggested that I was being unfairly > discriminating. What set this reaction off was that I said I would never do > business with someone who had those god-awful round earrings, popular with > some young men, that are embedded into ear lobes -- about the size of nickels > -- with holes in them where the ear lobe is supposed to be. Just looking at > those things make me VERY uncomfortable and if someone who had that done to > them were to try to sell me, say, a financial product like an IRA I would not > do business with them solely on that basis...even if it turned out to be the > greatest financial product there is. > > And that really set people off. > > But then I countered with: if someone had a big, fat swaztika tattooed on > their cheek, would YOU do business with them? > > The response? Silence. > > Now, studs in lips or ear lobe modifications are a far cry from swaztikas, > certainly, but I contend they are on the same spectrum and that I am with the > realm of reason to use these things as a basis to discriminate. Both ends of > the spectrum are done of free choice and both are expressions of the inner > person...and if I am made uncomfortable by them, why not discriminate against > that person on that basis?
I sometimes wonder what the hell these people are thinking with the image they project. One day I was standing in line at the local Hollywood Video and the guy in front of me had tattoos all over. I had to resist asking him if "The Illustrated Man" was his favorite film. A) he was probably born after the movie was made and never heard of it or B) may have laughed at the idea. But more likely A and being a thuggish looking character probably would not have found the remark funny. It would make a good gag for Larry David. I always wondered why some people wanted to make themselves look like a thug? To me it just looks like a joke making them out to be a joke. I think in their pea brains they believe it makes them look "tough." OTOH, the rise in dressing casually in the country is probably a method of looking innocuous and keeping themselves out of trouble. Seeing someone in a business suit what do you think?
