On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 04:24:43 -0800 (PST), A Moose in Love
> wrote:

>On Dec 20, 3:44*pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
>> On 20/12/2010 3:00 PM, Miche wrote:
>>
>> >> Tattoos and piercings have no health benefit, no cultural mandate in
>> >> general US culture (I realize some native tribes mandate it... I'm not
>> >> talking about that). For the general public, tattoos and piercings are
>> >> "self-expression". And in my opinion, they are nothing more than
>> >> permanent disfigurement. You wanna disfigure your body, be my guest,
>> >> but don't make me have to look at it.
>>
>> > Who's holding you down and forcing you to look at tattoos? *Shouldn't
>> > your beef be with them rather than the tattooed people?
>>
>> When someone is exposing them in public you really don't have much
>> choice about seeing it.
>>
>> The way I figure it is that if someone gets the number and type of
>> tattoos, piercings and other body mutilations to make themselves look
>> like freaks, I reserve the right to look and react as if they are
>> freaks. *It is not like *a strange skin condition, natural ugliness or
>> accidental dismemberment. When you do something that is bound to attract
>> attention you have to realize that you won`t always get the positive
>> feedback. And let`s face it, the people with the most bizarre tats and
>> mutilations are doing it for the shock value.
>
>And then there are the kids who walk around with their jeans pulled
>halfway down their backsides. You can't help but notice their stupid
>underwear. You can then choose to look away, but it's already too
>late.

You needn't look far for sensibility offending stupidity... read
usenet. No one makes you look at tattoos... I find folks displaying
religious items far more offensive than a nose stud... wearing say a
crucifix is far more a mutilation than a butterfly tat on a tit,
thumping a bible indicates your brain is mutilated.