Full Coverage: Links From All Over (Sept. 11, 2008)


[Military.com] If the History Channel has taught me anything (aside from providing a God’s-eye view of everything that ever happened to Hitler), it’s that the military has a proud tradition of commemorative tattoos, with each branch rather attached to its own unique iconography. In March 2007, however, the Marine Corps cracked down on and banned full-sleeve tattoos for Marine recruiters or security guards, though those with work completed before a certain date were grandfathered in. Now, a new administrative decision has extended the ban even to those who were granted an allowance:

[The decision defines] sleeve tattoos as a large tattoo or collection of smaller tattoos that covers or almost covers a person’s arm or leg. This also includes half and quarter sleeves if they are visible in green-on-green, physical training gear. […]

“Sleeve tattoos degrade our professional Marine image,” said Staff Sgt. Aaron McMullen, canvassing recruiter, Recruiting Substation Clarksville, Ind., Recruiting Station Louisville, Ky. “We keep our uniforms pressed, our brass shiny and our shoes polished. Sleeve tattoos don’t fit with that image.”

Marines with tattoo sleeves who are already on recruiting will be allowed to finish their tours however, recruiters wishing to submit a career-recruiter package “may not be favorably viewed” but will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The decision will ultimately rest with the deputy commandant for manpower and reserve affairs.

Photo credit: ESPN.com

It’s an unfortunate decision; one would hope their contributions would be highly valued enough that a tattoo sleeve wouldn’t have to inhibit Marines’ official interaction with the public. On the other hand, decorum seems vital to the USMC, and if they won’t truck with a moo-stache, maybe this shouldn’t be a complete surprise.

[ESPN.com] ESPN the Magazine recently put out a call for readers to send in photos of their College football-related tattoos, and at least 18 did! Nothing particularly striking, though I have to say, sports tattoos is one area in which BME is definitely lacking. I’m putting you on notice, sports fans! Start sending in photos of your tattoos. We know you’re out there.

[ThePittsburghChannel.com] Lindsay Lohan totes got tattoos to match Samantha Ronson’s! In more exciting news, the driver on the bus I take had his hair parted to the opposite side than usual this morning.

[Technoccult.com] OK, this is just plain awesome. I don’t know the context (or if the title, “Religious Body Piercing in India,” is in any way accurate), but this is the video to which they link — never mind the safety pins:

BME needs YOU!

In the past little while, we at BME have received e-mails from many of you complaining about the website at www.bme.com. Your concerns, namely, have centered around the site’s design, and that its links never led anywhere — and certainly not to BME content. This is the most recent version of the website.

title=

More versions can be viewed here: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

This was not our website. We did not authorize it. We certainly did not approve of it. Worse yet, after investigating, we learned that this was a pay-per-click site. In other words, when people went to that site looking for BME, if they clicked on any of the bogus links, they put money into the owner’s pocket. This was a classic trademark infringement/cyber-squatting scam. Evidence that visitors reaching BME.com were often searching for ModBlog or BMEvideo can be seen here.

The site’s owner was a man by the name of Greg Ricks. He gets sued for this kind of thing all the time.

Despite the fact that we could have sued him in court, seeking damages, we tried to resolve this amicably.

When that failed, instead of trying to collect money in court, we filed an arbitration before the World Intellectual Property Organization (view the complaint here). They responded (their response is here), and all three judges, including a judge they hand-picked, ruled unanimously in our favor. (View their decision here.)

Immediately after losing the decision, the cybersquatter tried to shake us down for $100,000 in exchange for not filing a lawsuit against us. When we refused to be intimidated, of all things, he sued us. (View his complaint here.)

Now he claims, ridiculously enough, that he, and not BME, is the “real” BME.

Naturally, the cybersquatter has already begun to manipulate the evidence. He tried to scrub the Internet Archive of evidence and gamed the search engines so that things look much different than they have to this point.

During this fight, we’d like to call upon the BME community to help keep an eye on things.

If you see any evidence that you think might be helpful in showing that we are, have always been, and will always be BME, we’d like to know. We have set up a special email address at [email protected]. Feel free to send in anything you might find.

We are prepared to defend ourselves against this frivolous lawsuit through all appropriate means. We will keep you posted as things develop. You made BME the great community it is today and we need your help to keep it that way!

Please take the time to place links to BME on any websites that you can. It doesn’t matter if it’s your MySpace or your personal blog. Anywhere that you can put our links and banners are appreciated!

It’s Just a Lip Piercing, For God’s Sake

Though I think it’s usually dumb and misguided, I have a hard time taking issue with a company that institutes a dress code that prohibits visible, tasteful modifications — by all means, that sort of thing is up to the discretion of the owner. When it comes to a school board banning them, however? It often comes off as an arbitrary and thoughtless use of power. So it goes in Portales, New Mexico: 13-year-old Kierra Seales has been informed that the clear bead she wants to wear in her lip piercing is unacceptable, and that the piercing will have to come out while at school. Her mother, Nkoshe, is calling it a First Amendment issue:

Photo credit: PNT / Mickey Winfield

“If we could accomplish changing the wording of the dress code, both sides would benefit,” Nkoshe Seales told the board. “The students would feel like they have the freedom to express themselves, and the administration and staff would no longer have to make an issue of the fashion trend.”

The current Portales schools’ dress code policy for piercing states that no student shall wear nose rings or nose studs or any type of visible body piercing accessory with the exception of earrings in the ear. […]

“The First Amendment is freedom of expression. Whether youth have First Amendment rights is still a legal question, but what is not in question is that they will (have them) some day,” Nkoshe argued. “Constraining them now from expressing themselves is no preparation for exercising those rights.”

Nkoshe has opened up a dialogue with the school board on the issue, and the board’s superintendent, Randy Fowler, seems open to reviewing the current rules and determining if a change in order. Nkoshe’s argument goes beyond a simple constitutional defense, though, and insists there are tangible benefits to body piercing:

“Piercing is a healthy and positive thing in some people’s lives,” Nkoshe said. “It encourages personal growth and self-discovery. Body piercing is the safest and most positive (expression) a youth could embrace given the alternatives of drugs, sex and gang violence.”

Well, I’m not sure those are the only alternatives, but … what do I know? Let’s see what the readers of the Portales News-Tribune have to say!

I wonder what this mother would think if Portales Schools went to using school uniforms? With the large number of students now, it would be helpful to the teachers if they knew who exactly should be on campus for safety reasons. Does she think teachers should also be able to express themselves by wearing what they would like and showing what they would like?

Hmm … well, the teacher issue seems like a bit of a straw man, but I’ll grant that if it’s a particularly problematic area, uniforms shouldn’t be discounted immediately. Even still though, aren’t piercings compatible with the institution of uniforms? One would think …

“I hope the School Board will remain firm in the set policy. Wearing a pistol on the hip, running naked in the streets are all part of self expression however thankfully there are laws and rules. Our schools are to teach. Teaching rules is part of education. This is why children are willful today.”

“Please change the rules for me because I am more special than all of the other kids who have gone through these schools and followed the rules. BULL!!!! I think it would be a very different circumstance if someone were to go into their place of business here in town and urinate in the floor. I think Ms. Seales would be very upset with you, and I don’t think she would be any happier if you told her that it was ok and should be allowed because you were just expressing yourself on the carpet.”

Oh, God damn it.

Mother protests school district policy on piercings [Portales News-Tribune]