Are Tattoos Really That Big Of A Distraction?

Dannie, I think if you did a poll (please don't) you would find most men are like me in they won't let it keep them from seeing a woman who otherwise appeals to them. A smaller percentage would say it is a non-starter, with the smallest percentage responding that they would consider it an enhancement.

As an art, I find some of the work outstanding. I can appriciate the work and skill involved (and pain) in rendering some of these masterpieces. That said, I too am not turned on by it. While I have been out with women with tats, I generaly find it a turn off. A small amount of descrete ink is OK and would not be a big deal but large areas of the body covered are a real distraction and turn off. Even with the strippers I know, most have little ink and none that have danced for me long term (2 or more years) have any. The only exception is Honey at BDFW. Her personality is so fantastic and attractive that it more than compensates for her tats.

Thank goodness WALDT :-)

All I have to say about the subject is that I have tattoos and the best clients in the universe. Thanks guys for not judging me on my ink

Only time I found it truly distracting was once when I happened to be looking down at a "tramp stamp" and noticed that it was not aligned properly i.e., the pointy part in the middle was not pointing to her starfish but to the left or right of it.

Only time I found it truly distracting was once when I happened to be looking down at a "tramp stamp" and noticed that it was not aligned properly i.e., the pointy part in the middle was not pointing to her starfish but to the left or right of it. Originally Posted by DustyHands

LOL - you must be an engineer!

There is art and trash in the tattoo world.

http://yourtattoosucks.com/\

Things to do in Dallas when you're drunk...
http://yourtattoosucks.com/wtf/alcoh...guns-dont-mix/

Go spend some time looking through the various categories on that site and those who just love ink might reconsider their view that it's all good.

But since this is a hobby board, let's not forget the most obvious issue to many guys here.

Pimp tattoos that brand the girl.

Some girls get branded and then they are marked for life. There are some girls who have been branded by their pimp who even if they leave, they are afraid that if they were to ever remove the tat or get a cover tat they will be beaten or worse.

Pimp brands are known to other pimps and some make it a game to try and bang another pimp's property or to try and steal them away. Yes, the NBA statements may just be a personal view/choice but there are WAY too many providers in Dallas with AA pimps who don't want another AA pimp to try and steal them away and the pimp branding marks them.

Guys on ECCIE can begin to notice certain brands if they are paying attention and the photographer has not been told to remove the brand in the photos.

There are some guys who will walk out if they arrive and see a pimp brand/tattoo.
----------------------
Edit to add.
Ever notice that the "hot" tattoo'ed women presented and raved about are almost 100% of the time those who are close to the ruleof100 crowd?

Can't say that most men find BBW's covered in ink to be a turn on. but then again, I'm not most men, just my own opinionated self.

[ ...]
what about 10-20 years from now when tats are out of style, the colors have all faded, and your new body shape gives them a different look?
[ ... ] Originally Posted by Lust4xxxLife

This was a pretty good answer/reason back in the 80's and even into the 90's, but I'd be willing to bet that the percentage of tatted/non-tatted ppl in the US is about 60 non/40 tatted right now.

In ten years I'd bet it'll be about even and in 20? I would be willing to bet that the majority of folks will have visible tattoos.

Of course, I'm basing this on purely personal and geographical (I am a dunce) findings. Twenty yrs ago I was the ONLY female I knew or saw in Northern Wisconsin with a visible tattoo - right on my goshdarn forearm, like a sailor (to quote my dearly departed mother)! Ten years ago, in this area, the majority of women had visible tats on their ankles or just above their bikini line.

Today? I go to the mall and there are women with tats that make me go OMG!!!

I kinda hope I'm around in 20 yrs to see if I'm right.

B.

LL is absolutely correct on the branding deal. I think most of us (providers) have a past and we have had some experience in world of management. The two go hand in hand, especially when first starting out on this adventure. I'll be balls-y enough to say that when I was 18 and new to the adult business, I had management that branded me. Difference is, it was explicitly explained to me that when I left, if he ever saw me in public with his name on me he had rights to cut it off my arm. That is kind of the rule. You don't get beaten up for having his name on you and covering it, you get in trouble if you aren't with them and still have the name. I quickly had it covered upon leaving. Point is, if you have a name on you of that nature, cover that shit up (or just don't do it in the first place) with another tat if that is what it takes, laser removal is not only expensive but painful and takes multiple procedures. Hindsight is 20/20 and the guys are not idiots, they know a pimp name when they see it. Your kid's name isn't "Big Daddy" or "Slick Willie" and they know that. And it's not cute. At all. Take it from me, you will regret doing it.

Here we go, this one is interesting...



Or this one...



Oe last one...

I'm actually turned on by some tattoos. Not averse to "tramp stamps," but don't care for them. But tastefully done, tats can be hot. Piercings?--bye, bye. But that's just me.

When they look like a NASCAR it might be a lil much Originally Posted by piquant2009

When the ladies start selling ad space I will have to reconsider my hobby activities.

I vote against ink. I won't see a girl because she has, I just don't care for it. But why they get them on their breast is something I don't undestand at all. Those are just flat out trashy!

Turlington's lower back tattoo remover........that tingling means it's working!

This was a pretty good answer/reason back in the 80's and even into the 90's, but I'd be willing to bet that the percentage of tatted/non-tatted ppl in the US is about 60 non/40 tatted right now.

In ten years I'd bet it'll be about even and in 20? I would be willing to bet that the majority of folks will have visible tattoos.

Of course, I'm basing this on purely personal and geographical (I am a dunce) findings. Twenty yrs ago I was the ONLY female I knew or saw in Northern Wisconsin with a visible tattoo - right on my goshdarn forearm, like a sailor (to quote my dearly departed mother)! Ten years ago, in this area, the majority of women had visible tats on their ankles or just above their bikini line.

Today? I go to the mall and there are women with tats that make me go OMG!!!

I kinda hope I'm around in 20 yrs to see if I'm right.

B. Originally Posted by Bella_HHD

According to a friend's brother (who has made it his career as an MD removing tats) around 10 to 15% of the US population has tats. That number increases to 25 to 30% in the 20 to 35 year old age group. He also stated that the regret rate is quite high, about 66% of people who get tats regret it with in the first five years of having one (down from 75% 10 years ago). Of course, he has made a good living off that buyer's remorse. I can't post a link to theses statistics, as they come from a conversation we had not too long ago (last month in fact).

(Yes, I'm an engineer and stupid numbers will stick in my brain...)