This man is a scumbag...

Esoteric_

Princess Peach wrote: »

How old is she and what do you mean well educated? I only saw that one article about her, doesn't say much about her background at all.

Don't know her exact age, but I'd be guessing around my own age, as she graduated university with a degree two years ago. As for well educated, she has a degree, so she's educated. That was what I got from her own Facebook page, as the article didn't give much information.

Princess Peach

She looks about 12 to me :pac: I saw her Facebook and it's in Russian, and I wouldn't be taking that as the truth. And people can finish university very young anyway.

Plus having a degree implies nothing about a person's state of mind or maturity.

Esoteric_

Princess Peach wrote: »

She looks about 12 to me :pac: I saw her Facebook and it's in Russian, and I wouldn't be taking that as the truth. And people can finish university very young anyway.

Plus having a degree implies nothing about a person's state of mind or maturity.

That's why I looked at her Facebook, because I thought she looked like a teenager. I know you can finish university young, but I started university straight after turning 17. Even if she started at 16, which is the youngest that unis accept students, she'd be 20 by the time she graduated with a degree.

I didn't comment on her maturity or state of mind, because none of us know anything about that. But I still think an educated adult should be giving some of the blame for agreeing to something so blatantly stupid, not just blaming it all on the tattoo artist.

Princess Peach

A Facebook translated from Russian doesn't really mean she did a 4 year degree, I don't even know what the system is in Russia anyway! Does it say what she even studied? You can get a diploma in basket weaving from Trinity! I don't take university education as a sign of anything.

I think it's a pretty reasonable inference that she isn't all right seeing as she had her face tattooed. And she may have consented and asked for it, but he was the one with the needle in his hand and could have said no.

Dermighty

Why is this crap even in this forum? It's a news item, not a tattooing and piercing item, in my opinion.

Esoteric_

Dermighty wrote: »

Why is this crap even in this forum? It's a news item, not a tattooing and piercing item, in my opinion.

It's a news item ABOUT tattooing. :pac: If an artist is doing something that will ultimately give himself a terrible reputation, of course people here are going to be interested in it.

Cupcake_Crisis

There's a few ways to look at this. Maybe they are head over heels in love and will spend the rest of their lives together blissfully happily. The tattoo at least wont infringe on that aspect of her life at least. We could just be being cynical and assuming he groomed her and abused her in such a way. Maybe it really was just love at first sight and they're expressing it in a bizarre way.

Or, a much more likely scenario, he's going to bleed her for every drop of publicity he can possibly drain from her, then have no more to do with her. In which case her life is essentially ruined.

Imo, he is a tattoo artist. He knows we don't live in a society where tattoo's are freely accepted. If it was a question of power and possession, and she happily consented to wearing his name for the rest of her life, then ETHICALLY he should have tattoo'd her in a more concealable place. So, yes, I do think it's a little bit scummy and egotistical of him. I'm all for grand romantic gestures, but not ones that will ruin your life if it all goes tits up.

This is less an expression of love and commitment, and more a reinforcement of the negative stereotypes tattoo artists and tattoo wearers endure.

Marty McFly

bodice ripper wrote: »

I'll not be told about tattoo ethics by an enthusiast.

Nice display of ego there, discounting someone's opinion because there not a tattoo artist is ridiculous, and you yourself just displayed one of the often talked about bad traits of tattoo artists.

The Fat Hat

The Fat Hat wrote: »

Anyone involved in tattooing is generally odd. To mark or have your body marked permanently is abnormal. Two wrongs don't make a right here. Each as odd as the other

I think we have the most idiotic post this far right here. Most of the people I know have piercings and/or tattoos and most are perfectly normal people who you wouldn't look at twice if you passed them in the street.

A few people still look at piercings and tats as something odd but 99% of the world has absolutely no problem with them and anyone who says otherwise is plain wrong.

bodice ripper

Marty McFly wrote: »

Nice display of ego there, discounting someone's opinion because there not a tattoo artist is ridiculous, and you yourself just displayed one of the often talked about bad traits of tattoo artists.

In response to an amazingly condescending post, I am fine with it. Was it your post with the "i think we can all agree..." despite numerous dissenters? Seems a bit arrogant and dismissive, doesn't it?

Marty McFly

bodice ripper wrote: »

In response to an amazingly condescending post, I am fine with it. Was it your post with the "i think we can all agree..." despite numerous dissenters? Seems a bit arrogant and dismissive, doesn't it?

Condescending The post you quoted was not one bit condescending imo it was just someone disagreeing with your viewpoint which you took offence to and then decided to belittle by making a comment dismissing it because you work in the industry and they don't.

Your opinion on here is often highly thought off and respected, but in a thread of this nature everyone's opinion is as valid as the next because you work in the industry does not make you the be all and end all and discounting someones opinion because of it is ridiculous. Even if you found the post condescending you could have responded in a better way instead of stamping your ego all over it.

As for the second part of your post what are you talking about? If you want to attack a post of mine at least quote it so I know what the hell you're talking about.

Hellrazer

Marty McFly wrote: »

Your opinion on here is often highly thought off and respected, but in a thread of this nature everyone's opinion is as valid as the next because you work in the industry does not make you the be all and end all and discounting someones opinion because of it is ridiculous.

Marty.In all fairness in a thread of this nature I think Bodice Ripper opinion does hold more water than those not involved in the industry.

She has always been on the side of ethical behaviour of tattoo artists.

BR is correct in saying that there is a general concensus that tattoo artists are not looked upon in the best light and the original article does nothing to dispel this myth.


Who else in any business is in a better position to comment on bad workmanship than someone who works there??
Even in my RL job(the motor trade) Id be in a better position to comment on an article than someone whos not involved in that industry and I have done and will continue to do so.

I dont know what you do in RL but if I wasnt qualified to make a valued opinion on something that you raised (knowing more about it than me) I wouldnt give any more than a personal opinion on it.

I think thats the point that Bodice Ripper is trying to convey here ie that being involved in the industry she knows more about this issue than anyone else not involved in it.

Hellrazer

The Fat Hat wrote: »

Anyone involved in tattooing is generally odd. To mark or have your body marked permanently is abnormal. Two wrongs don't make a right here. Each as odd as the other

Oh and BTW--Banned permanently.

Marty McFly

Hellrazer wrote: »

Marty.In all fairness in a thread of this nature I think Bodice Ripper opinion does hold more water than those not involved in the industry.

She has always been on the side of ethical behaviour of tattoo artists.

BR is correct in saying that there is a general concensus that tattoo artists are not looked upon in the best light and the original article does nothing to dispel this myth.


Who else in any business is in a better position to comment on bad workmanship than someone who works there??
Even in my RL job(the motor trade) Id be in a better position to comment on an article than someone whos not involved in that industry and I have done and will continue to do so.

I dont know what you do in RL but if I wasnt qualified to make a valued opinion on something that you raised (knowing more about it than me) I wouldnt give any more than a personal opinion on it.

I think thats the point that Bodice Ripper is trying to convey here ie that being involved in the industry she knows more about this issue than anyone else not involved in it.

Ok I will concede you do have a point there , but at the same time all Bodice has done in this thread is been argumentative and shown an ego without giving well thought out responses along with labeling the man to that of a woman beater without knowing either individuals story or personality who are both consenting adults all anyone here can do is hazard a guess and give an opinion on the subject labeling someone similar to a woman beater is a disgusting thing to do without knowing all the facts imo and then to show one of the worst traits of tattoo artists that is commonly discussed amongst enthusiasts and artists themselves doesn't help.

I know you yourself worked as an apprentice in the industry and like bodice I always like to read and respect your posts but I can't respect a post when someone dismisses another persons opinion in an open forum by brashly shoving there ego in your face, instead of giving a well thought out and well worded response.

Marty McFly

Also people have gone down the the road of trying to psychoanalyze the photo in the bme piece as a mean to justify how he's a scumbag and controlling her, but as I'm sure most have had experiences of professional photographers, you can be assured they didnt just strike up that pose they were guided into it, with the photographer telling them move your head this way, arm that way etc, this is not a photo taken a off a camera phone.

If anything all that proves is BME is trying to gain media attention and are displaying them in this manner.

In my opinion there both gob****es but labelling him a scumbag or to that of a woman beater without knowing all the facts or the personalities of the people behind something two consenting adults decided to do is stupid imo.

anonymous2013

I think a tattoo like this is a sign of ownership (obviously).. And for that reason i would see him as an insecure possesive sort of individual who is clearly taking advantage of a woman who has no self worth..

bodice ripper

Deleted User wrote: »

It's clear that the op has over reacted slightly to the story and I can see where they are coming from but their vitriol toward the man in question is unneeded and unfair. He may not be the nicest person in the world and may not showcase the best qualities of the average Tattoo artists but some of the accusations made by the op and others would make many view them as scumbags.

bodice ripper wrote: »

I'll not be told about tattoo ethics by an enthusiast.

Deleted User wrote: »

So my opinion ob the ethics behind tattooing are less valid than yours because I'm not a professional tattooist? Utter crap, just because you work in the industry does not mean that your thoughts on this man carry any more weight than mine.

Marty McFly wrote: »

Nice display of ego there, discounting someone's opinion because there not a tattoo artist is ridiculous, and you yourself just displayed one of the often talked about bad traits of tattoo artists.

Withdrawn.

I responded poorly to being dismissed in such a condescending manner.

What I should have said was

"I will not be told about tattoo ethics by someone who thinks tattooing your name over two thirds of the face of a woman you met that day is acceptable".

I do have more experience than you, but you don't need it to see why this tattoo is a dick move.

Esoteric_

nobody said that what he did was acceptable. you're just reading what you want from the posts here. no need to be so patronizing to people.

Star Lord

Justifying it as 'what she wanted', etc... did seem to be saying it was acceptable to me too. The girl had just met him. She got his name tattooed across her face, taking up most of her face. Does that seem like the action of someone mentally stable to you?

He should not have tattooed that on her face. Doing so was a scummy/unethical thing to do.

Marty McFly

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

Justifying it as 'what she wanted', etc... did seem to be saying it was acceptable to me too. The girl had just met him. She got his name tattooed across her face, taking up most of her face. Does that seem like the action of someone mentally stable to you?

He should not have tattooed that on her face. Doing so was a scummy/unethical thing to do.

While I do get what your saying how are we to know the woman's mental state? All we can do is speculate and by saying she has mental issues could be a very harsh thing to say, unless someone actually has spoken to or known the woman then all accusations of her being mentally unstable are unfounded. Were going by what we read on a BME article who love controversy and being extreme anyway.

Lets just say this woman is mentally stable for a second shes a mature young woman who wanted this done who are we of all people to judge her? Aren't we just becoming like those who judge people for having any tattoos at all.

While what people are saying may be true he may be a scumbag, he may be a control freak bit without knowing all the facts can any of us be sure as to truely what went on between these do individuals that lead them down this path to him tattooing her face?


While personally I do think it was a stupid thing to do and never in a million years would I have someones name tattooed on my own body people do it all the time less extreme yes but it happens a lot maybe he shouldn't have done it maybe he should have known better but also maybe its what she really wanted as a mentally stable woman, who knows next week there might be a picture of him circulating with her name tattooed on his face we cant be sure as of yet and until someone shows something more conclusive other than second guessing ill reserve my judgement. I wont brand him a scumbag or her mentally unstable without knowing all the facts and not that of bme article everyone her labeling him a scumbag could be 100% correct but no one knows for sure as of yet.

Star Lord

Marty McFly wrote: »

While I do get what your saying how are we to know the woman's mental state? All we can do is speculate and by saying she has mental issues could be a very harsh thing to say, unless someone actually has spoken to or known the woman then all accusations of her being mentally unstable are unfounded. Were going by what we read on a BME article who love controversy and being extreme anyway.
...
I wont brand him a scumbag or her mentally unstable without knowing all the facts and not that of bme article everyone her labeling him a scumbag could be 100% correct but no one knows for sure as of yet.

I'm not going by what's being said on BME. I'm commenting on extreme actions taken by a couple that have known each other a very short amount of time. They are not indicative of a stable frame of mind.

I'm also commenting on what was done by a tattoo artist who seems to want to do anything in order to court controversy and to boost his on notoriety.

jenizzle

He has to have some sort of ethical responsibility though. People go into tattoo studios all the time looking for tattoos that artists won't do for ethical reasons e.g. hands, knuckles or neck tattoos on those not heavily modified. I wouldn't go so far as to call him a scumbag, but he should've taken the ethical high ground. If she's so insistent on getting a full body suit in time, could she not have picked somewhere else on her body to start with? This should be something he should've insisted on, and that's what I have an issue with.

Marty McFly

DamoElDiablo wrote: »

I'm not going by what's being said on BME. I'm commenting on extreme actions taken by a couple that have known each other a very short amount of time. They are not indicative of a stable frame of mind.

I'm also commenting on what was done by a tattoo artist who seems to want to do anything in order to court controversy and to boost his on notoriety.

Yeh they are not good indications of a stable mind but nor is it concrete proof that she is not mentally stable so all we can do here is speculate on whether or not this woman is mentally stable or not.

I guess time will tell because Im sure this wont be the last we will be hearing of this, so for now ill reserve judgement and if someone comes back with more proof I will willingly hold my hands up and admit he is a scumbag then.

bodice ripper

Marty McFly wrote: »

Lets just say this woman is mentally stable for a second shes a mature young woman who wanted this done who are we of all people to judge her? Aren't we just becoming like those who judge people for having any tattoos at all.


.

Great point, but I am not judging her. I am judging him, as tattooer. Ethically bankrupt scumbag.

catallus

I know where you're coming from but it really isn't surprising to see a scumbag having no ethics. He's a publicity hungry fiend, she walked into the whole thing. We can judge all we like but it's the way of the world to allow people to make their own mistakes, however horrific, (and this is a profound horrid mistake on her part), and my guess is he'll do it again, to some other vulnerable young woman (he probably wouldn't get a kick out of it if it were a man).

stonecutter01

How awkward is that wedding going to be? I just imagine all her relatives seeing her for the first time with a that facial tattoo and the small talk between the tattooist and her parents, "so your the fella that tattooed his name on my beautiful girls face".

Seriously though, I'm all for people doing what they want with their bodies but even if she begged him to do that, he could have at least convinced her to go with a different placement. An ethical tattoo artist wouldn't even consider tattooing someones face who is not already heavily covered, let alone covering half their face with their own name.

Arawn

Oh super it's now in the Irish media, Ireland am.....some people are into that "tattoo art" said in a way that irked me. Tv needs actual young people that know what this generation likes

Princess Peach

They mentioned her age anyway, she's 18.

bodice ripper

bodice ripper wrote: »

Withdrawn.

I responded poorly to being dismissed in such a condescending manner.

What I should have said was

"I will not be told about tattoo ethics by someone who thinks tattooing your name over two thirds of the face of a woman you met that day is acceptable".

I do have more experience than you, but you don't need it to see why this tattoo is a dick move.

I was not being condescending. It's clear that you believe your opinion on the matter to be superior to anyone elses and if someone disagrees with you then they are wrong.

No one has defended the tattooist or said that it was acceptable but to label him as a scumbag and compare him to a woman beater is uncalled for. We know very few of the details of the situation and for all we know they have been in contact online for months, I know one couple who got married three days after meeting one another after a few months of online chatting. For all you or I know the girl actively sought the man out with the intention of having him tattoo his name on her face. Should he have done so, no he should not have but it takes two to tango and she has as much blame for the stupidness on display as he does.

Princess Peach

Bodice Ripper didn't actually compare it to beating a woman, she used that as an example of how someone defended the action because the girl let him do it.

In my opinion its still a display of control over a partner. A friend of mine is in an emotionally abusive relationship, he tells her who she can and can't see and when. She defends their relationship by saying at least he doesn't hit her. Does that make what he does good? No. Just cause this tattoo artists didn't hit the girl doesn't make his actions right. Just a different form of control. He has branded her so the whole world knows she is his, just cause she let him doesn't make it right.