|
#13
●
12-09-2009, 04:50 PM
|
|
Re: Ink is for WIMPS!
What an imbecile, that woman. Tats, other body art, and body piercings are low-class. I see people with those things and immediately think, "uneducated, uncultured, uncivilized lowlifes", even if isn't necessarily always the case. Yeah, I'm judgmental.
|
|
#17
●
12-09-2009, 05:11 PM
|
|
Re: Ink is for WIMPS!
Lol well that's your narrow-minded sheltered self, mister. I've a coupla tats, and i'm nowhere near "low-class, uneducated, uncultured, uncivilised or a lowlife".. you're beating to the sound of your own drum on that one.. or whatever has be drummed in. :p
|
|
#19
●
12-09-2009, 06:18 PM
|
|
Re: Ink is for WIMPS!
Seeing how I qualified my statement twice, there's no need for the vitriol. Disdain is my reflex reaction, and I realize it's at least partly a function of my being a little narrow-minded. I will never understand the desire to have tattoos or face piercings. It's as if you're walking around with a fucking dunce cap on your head, screaming, "I'm a loser". Your choice? Sure, but why make that choice? Choose instead to present yourself to the world in a dignified, classy manner. Of course tattoos and such are superficial, and many tattooed folks are probably lovely human beings, but tats elicit a negative first impression. |
|
#20
●
12-09-2009, 06:35 PM
|
|
Re: Ink is for WIMPS!
You have a fantastic way with words Don (not that I understand many of them, what with my being one of the aforementioned ghastly, inked neanderthals). For some reason, I have a strange mental image of you as the archetypal elderly gentleman, complete with smoking jacket, butler, and monocle! Of course, this impression is, in all likelihood, wildly inaccurate.......but I still wouldn't be surprised to discover you're addressed as 'The Colonel' by the staff at your gentleman's club! |