Because it’s essentially saying that her decision to get tattoos is the equivalent of her vandalizing her body. It’s a meme criticizing a woman for choosing what she wants to do with her body, which is just a tamer version of “your body my choice”.
I saw that more like a criticism of the tattooing style, not her life decisions. Your body my choice is downright authoritarian. I don’t see how it relates to this.
And the meme completely breaks down if the building is considered art so let’s not play dumb. We both know in this meme the building isn’t representing art.
The meme suggests that this beautiful woman made herself less attractive by getting tattoos. People who tend to agree with that statement are not necessarily nazis fascists sexists Trump voters rapists church goers and so on, despite the fact that many of that ilk share similar sentiments (but for completely different reasons). Believe it or not, not everyone likes this aesthetic and this is not political.
If you think “I don’t like tattoos on women” is the same as “women with tattoos look like vandalized buildings” then you’re missing the nuances necessary to have this discussion.
First of all I didn’t say any of these things. You assumed both. Personally I don’t like tagging, which is not the same as graffiti. Graffiti art can be great. There’s street art out there that’s breathtaking.
Same for tattoos. For starters I never distinguished between men and women. You did that. I have nothing against tattoos as a general concept. I’m not a fan of this particular style of cliché designs scattered about.
Here’s my perspective on tattoos if you’re interested:
In western cultures tattoos started out as distinguishers of society’s outcasts, prisoners etc. Their popularisation in the last few decades began from successful individuals who somehow “made it” in life. Rock stars, football players etc, usually people from lower or middle class families who made a lot of money. For them unconsciously tattoos in visible places signify that they are successful in an unorthodox way, it shows to everyone that they can be different, they can stand out because they have money and they don’t need an employer/ master, they don’t need to look presentable, wear a suit (uniform) to work etc. In essence they’re free from the shackles of labour. Tattoos became a sign of individuality and success in that way.
Nowadays that everyone and their mother has tattoos and nobody cares anymore, in order to serve their purpose they need to be more and more outlandish and provocative, hence the face tattoo fad etc. I predict that in a few years from now kids will reject the concept and it might even be cool not to have them.
Because it’s essentially saying that her decision to get tattoos is the equivalent of her vandalizing her body. It’s a meme criticizing a woman for choosing what she wants to do with her body, which is just a tamer version of “your body my choice”.
I saw that more like a criticism of the tattooing style, not her life decisions. Your body my choice is downright authoritarian. I don’t see how it relates to this.
Even if it is a criticism of the tattooing style it’s still likening it to vandalism. It doesn’t change the message behind the meme.
See what you and I call vandalism on that building some call art.
And the meme completely breaks down if the building is considered art so let’s not play dumb. We both know in this meme the building isn’t representing art.
The meme suggests that this beautiful woman made herself less attractive by getting tattoos. People who tend to agree with that statement are not necessarily nazis fascists sexists Trump voters rapists church goers and so on, despite the fact that many of that ilk share similar sentiments (but for completely different reasons). Believe it or not, not everyone likes this aesthetic and this is not political.
If you think “I don’t like tattoos on women” is the same as “women with tattoos look like vandalized buildings” then you’re missing the nuances necessary to have this discussion.
First of all I didn’t say any of these things. You assumed both. Personally I don’t like tagging, which is not the same as graffiti. Graffiti art can be great. There’s street art out there that’s breathtaking. Same for tattoos. For starters I never distinguished between men and women. You did that. I have nothing against tattoos as a general concept. I’m not a fan of this particular style of cliché designs scattered about.
Here’s my perspective on tattoos if you’re interested: In western cultures tattoos started out as distinguishers of society’s outcasts, prisoners etc. Their popularisation in the last few decades began from successful individuals who somehow “made it” in life. Rock stars, football players etc, usually people from lower or middle class families who made a lot of money. For them unconsciously tattoos in visible places signify that they are successful in an unorthodox way, it shows to everyone that they can be different, they can stand out because they have money and they don’t need an employer/ master, they don’t need to look presentable, wear a suit (uniform) to work etc. In essence they’re free from the shackles of labour. Tattoos became a sign of individuality and success in that way. Nowadays that everyone and their mother has tattoos and nobody cares anymore, in order to serve their purpose they need to be more and more outlandish and provocative, hence the face tattoo fad etc. I predict that in a few years from now kids will reject the concept and it might even be cool not to have them.