In response to the recent BME poll "are tattooed women more slutty" I have decided to write my version of Michael Smerconish's article. It is then up to you fine people to accept my editorial because you believe I have a valid opinion or deny it because you think I am talking shit. However, I will try to justify my answers and come up with a fair argument against Michael's article, enjoy!
At A Glance Author Brad Porter Contact [email protected] IAM issueskid When N/A
As you can see I think Michael is talking shit and so far 79.92 % of the 259 people who have voted, agreed with me. I believe tattooed women are not considered more likely to be players or "slutty". For a start, many people now have a tattoo, weather it be a small rose or a full back piece, its just pretty common now a days.
If I were to walk into a club and find a girl to chat up, I would look around and to be honest if two similar looking girls were sitting by each other and one had a tattoo and one did not then the only reason I would pick the tattooed girl is because I would probably have more in common with her, for a start I could ask her about her tattoo, show her mine and talk about other things following on from this. The girl with no tattoo would be harder to talk to because firstly I would have to think of a conversation starter, secondly she could be put off by my tattoos and piercings, maybe she dos not have a tattoo because she does not like them, she is put off by them, she does not like tattooed boys etc...
Following on from this point, if two girls were in a club and the tattooed girl was less attractive I would defiantly talk to the girl with no tattoos, which is more attractive. Girls with tattoos are not seen as players!
"Only a woman who wants to be perceived as a player will sport a tattoo. So she may as well be a player". What utter bullshit, this is not only a sexist comment "she may as well be a player" but is also totally wrong. This guy really needs to get out in the real world and see that many girls who chose to show off tattoos are not always interested in "pulling" and probably not a sex crazed maniac who has spent �150 to sport a tattoo just to pull. Many girl and guys will show off their tattoos because they are proud of their artists work, proud of their individuality or like many people on BME and IAM, they like to think of their body as a canvas and paint and pierced it so why can't the whole world see and appreciate it? Obviously Michael does not see it this way, he can't appreciate that women have a right to show off a tattoo just as much as men do without being seen as a "player". Does he know tattoos are a form of art and not an invitation for him to get his cock out?
Yet again Michael comes out with the ridiculous statement, "They have to know this. And if they know it, that must be why they get tattooed to begin with. Not only are they players, they want certain guys to know it". He was referring to the reason women get tattooed. Yet again this sexist pervert is now claiming women purposely get tattoos so they can bee seen as a player.
Ok well although I am seriously trying to get a point across here, lets have a look, and a laugh at his next sexist comment, Michael seems to mention that he has saw tattoos on people of both genders and all ages, He's now gaining a bit of my trust again, taking himself away from the sexist issues, then he just can not help himself he has to mention females, teenage females. "On people of all ages, and both genders, although particularly visible on teenage girls". What's wrong with this man? Can he not stop mentioning young females that he sees as players?
To be honest, I am now thinking this is all a fantasy in his head. He genuinely thinks women with tattoos are players because he wishes they were, he likes the idea that he can go into a club and instantly spot a player because of a marking or picture on their skin. He loves this idea, maybe he is a pervert? He likes to think that he can walk up to a girl with a tattoo and not get a slap around the face, however the virgin ink girl will probably throw her drink over him.
The only decent argument to support Michael's findings is when he says "As part of my investigation, I spoke with a self-proclaimed body artist. For $10, he puts them on. He told me that the "Pamela Anderson" is particularly popular. It looks like barbed wire and is intended for the bicep. I figure that means the ex- "Baywatch" star has one. I don't remember that - but I do remember the video with Tommy Lee. No surprise there. After all, she's a player". Finally I think he has a valid point to argue against. Pamela Anderson is seen as a player, her raunchy look, her movie "Barbed wire", being in Baywatch, making the video with Tommy Lee etc...but alas, this is one woman, she does not represent every tattooed girl. I'm guessing Pamela is not into tattoos as she does not have any major work, therefore she was just jumping on the bandwagon, she was a player without the tattoo, and she is still a player now. Before she had the tattoo people saw her as a player, after the tatto o people still saw her as a player. Sorry Michael but again your argument is poor.
Michael then talks about his growing concern for women getting tattooed, here he tried to pretend he is full of morals, he would never see a woman as a player, he just knows other guys do...apparently. "But my concern is different. I see a tattoo craze sweeping the beaches, and I don't know if the younger women getting tattooed are aware of the message guys take from the ink". Now my concern is that people like Michael have this attitude and they are the ones thinking tattooed women are players, Michael's real concern should be himself and the way he thinks.
Michael's next issues that he needs to sort out are "MAYBE WE'RE branding an entire new generation that doesn't know any better. Maybe they aren't players. Maybe they don't want to be perceived as players". The truth is Michael; it is you branding them as players, not us. You perceive them as players and your article has probably made a few more dull minded fucks like you believe the same thing, next time they go out they could see a tattooed girl and think she's going to be easy to get into bed because she has a tattoo.
Michael goes out in his perverted, sexist blaze of glory by finally saying "Best we leave the tattoos for the real players". So Michael's belief is you should leave tattoos to the players, the girls who want to be "pulled", the girls who are up for a good time, the girls who don't care who they fuck, and the girls who will bed anybody. All you females on BME, Michael thinks you're all players; maybe you should get your body art removed? Obviously not my views, but this is how Michael sees things. Does Michael have a girl friend or does he look at pictures of tattooed girl on the internet fantasizing that he could have them easily because after all Michael there all players...