The conventional wisdom is well established at this point: Outside of certain cultural traditions, henna tattoos are something you get done as a vacation time-killer in between having your hair put into cornrows and getting hit on by swarthy European millionaires who want nothing more than an afternoon with someone else’s wife. Harmless, right? WRONG. Dead wrong. Henna’s bloodlust knows no bounds and, make no mistake, it’s coming for you. You and your children. This red-inked menace is even taking the shape of beloved American cartoon characters in its quest to disfigure and mutilate the youth of today:

A boy of three was scarred for life after suffering horrific burns from a dodgy holiday henna tattoo of Bart Simpson.

Vinnie England got the temporary image of his TV hero from a Spanish street stall.

But the trader may not have been using the safe, natural henna he claimed because Vinnie suffered an appalling reaction. His skin became inflamed, sore and blistered.

Now he has a three-inch bright red outline of Bart drying his backside on his forearm.

The ink has since faded from this young hero’s arm, but the scar may be permanent (probably not). Some suspect that the ink may have been mixed with a low-cost hair dye called PPD, which is known for instigating poor skin reactions and is commonly combined with henna, but who are you going to believe? Those fat-cats shilling for the multi-billion dollar henna industry? I think not.

The issue I take with these sorts articles is not that the authors don’t appreciate body modification, but rather that they so often allow their lack of understanding to take the form of a hatred and mistrust of those for whom body modification is fundamentally important. Because of this, the level of discourse just tends to devolve into “… and 60 years from now, old people who are bitter because they tattooed their faces when they were still in the womb and never got a job will be furious because of their inky, flabby, unemployed skin and their inevitable uprising will give way to the extremist Muslim rapture!” and other such statements that are supposed to explain why body modification isn’t just an unattractive fad (or whatever), but is actually indicative of the hell-bound path on which our society has found itself, and it’s all because Scarlett Johansson got her septum pierced or the tollbooth guy had a tattoo on his neck.

With all that said, I’m admittedly confused by this column by Brian Goodings of The Blue Mountains Courier-Herald, which seems to take the opinion that … well, I can’t quite tell.

Photo source: Getty Images

So, in its bi-monthly attempt to take the onion off its belt and prove how hip it is, the New York Times has published a piece on the ever-increasing acceptability of tattoos in the mainstream and it’s actually not so bad. There are a few predictably hilarious quotes, such as this reaction to Project Runway season three victor Jeffrey Sebelia’s large throat tattoo:

“I was, like, ‘Whoa.’ It wasn’t a prison tattoo. It wasn’t sailors or criminals. It was this real-life person that you saw being creative and successful, and it really affected your perception about who gets tattooed.”

So that’s a nice, positive sentiment. And, since it’s the New York Times, this has gotten some pretty heavy coverage all over the series of tubes. What say the Internets?

Jessica Grose, Jezebel: “We were already aware that tattoos have lost their taboo status because the Times keeps telling us. Over and over and over and over again. They want to make sure we know that moms and dads and heartbroken doctors and heartbroken writers and even the Jews are getting inked. After the jump, some passages from these taboo busting articles that show, once and for all, that getting a tattoo is about as transgressive as eating a donut (think of the transfats!).”

Michael M. O’Hear, Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog: “While the article has led me to reconsider that flaming skull I’ve always thought would look great on my forehead, I do note that ‘lawyer’ is not in the list of professions in which visible tattoos are becoming more common. I wonder, though, whether there are some outposts of the legal profession in which tattoos have become the norm, or are at least more accepted than in others. And is there a resource guide somewhere for inked-up law students letting them know which employers are tattoo-friendly and which are not? Maybe this should be part of the NALP form . . . .”

Ann Althouse: “Who knew you had to earn your neck tattoo? I’d have thought getting a neck tattoo as opposed to, say, one of those peeping-over-the-pantyline tattoos was a real demonstration of commitment. Ten (or more) years ago I stood in line at the University Bookstore behind a pretty young woman who had a tattoo on her neck of an old-fashioned, claw-footed bathtub — complete with the extended pipe and shower-head. ‘Poseur’ is not the word that crossed my mind.”

Half Sigma: “I think they have prole drift backwards. The higher classes are taking on the habits of the lower classes.

It still seems incredibly stupid to get a tattoo. What happens when they go out of style? It’s still not considered upper class. Why permanently prevent yourself from ever being upper class?

Nevertheless, I see many white people in Manhattan with white collar jobs and probably college degrees who have tattoos. I suspect that they are all voting for Obama. College gradautes with tattoos just has a left-wing feel to it, but I can’t pinpoint why. Normally, left-wing people have no qualms about hating low-class white culture like hunting and NASCAR. It’s a real shame that the General Social Survey has never asked any questions about tattoos.”

Photo credit: Hector Vallenilla / Pacific Coast News

[People.com] In as much as you can deduce anything about celebrities from seeing them on television and through media coverage, Heidi Klum seems legitimately goofy enough to be genuinely likable. (I have no doubt that immediately after this gets posted, it’ll be revealed that she operates a concentration camp in her garage or poisoned the drinking water of a small town or eats veal or something.) Anyway, she’s just showed up in public recently sporting a new forearm tattoo (AHH SCANDAL) to commemorate her anniversary with her husband, Seal (AWW), which she explains as such:

“My husband and I always get married every year,” said Klum. “It was our fourth wedding, and we wanted to have our names tattooed together. So it’s my husband’s name and our three children, their initials, in the [three] stars.”

Tim Gunn was not available for comment, who claimed it was getting a little dusty in the back of his Towncar.

[BestCelebGossip.com] You would think that when you make the decision to marry one of the dinks from Good Charlotte, you accept that ill-advised tattoos will be as unavoidable as soul-destroyingly-bad mall punk being blasted around the homestead. Well, Nicole Richie is taking a stand against the tattoo plans of whichever guy it is from Good Charlotte to whom she’s married!

From the sounds of it, Joel has been considering getting another tattoo, but this is something she has put her foot down. Oddly enough, Joel wanted to have a tattoo of their six month old Harlow etched onto his tooth of all places, and Nicole reportedly lost her temper over the whole situation. He had said some time ago, promised even, that he wasn’t going to get any more tattoos, but when a friend suggested doing something out of the box, such as the tooth tattoo, he wanted to go for it.

Umm … unless our friend Joel has some positively Barbaro-sized chompers, I’m not entirely sure how well this would have worked out even if he had been allowed.

[ContactMusic.com] Megan Fox has a lot going for her. She’s easy to look at. She’s brash and doesn’t seem to possess a self-editing mechanism. She’s incapable of taking a picture in which she doesn’t look like she’s about three-and-a-half seconds away from blowing you. I mean really, what’s not to like? But the 22-year-old is also somewhat tattooed — especially for an up-and-coming actress — and doesn’t take kindly to people who find her ink trashy.

“Everyone hates them because they’re closed-minded about tattoos. People who don’t like me, as far as fans go, always talk about how I’m trashy because I have tattoos. I find that insane! This is 2008, not 1950. Tattoos aren’t limited to sailors. I find them beautiful, so I’m going to keep doing it.”

Photo credit: Peter Parsons / The Chronicle Herald staff

[The Chronicle Herald] As a rule, it’s probably best not to advocate tattoos as a means of winning a bet or a contest. Unless it’s a happy moment of serendipity in which a situation arises in which you were planning on getting a tattoo anyway — or, at least, that the situation inspires you to get a piece that you enjoy but may not have considered otherwise — the results will likely be dire. (I swear, that photo-realistic sleeve of Oprah horse-whipping the Pope in drag was for charity!) Luckily, JoAnn Harpell isn’t in the regretful camp: the Nova Scotia woman got a portrait of Elton John on her leg (right) in order to win a radio contest to see John in concert.

“The only thing I wouldn’t have done (to get a ticket) would be to go to a scalper,” Ms. Harpell said.

And she did try to get tickets when they first went on sale for the Halifax and Moncton concerts.

“I cried like a baby when I didn’t get them,” she said. “I was very upset.”

The serendipitous part is that Harpell was already moderately tattooed, and there are a few songs in Sir Elton’s catalogue that are incredibly meaningful for her — the lyrics of which were incorporated into the new piece. Sweet story, right? Surely the commenters visiting The Chronicle Herald’s Web site agree, right?

“I can’t believe that anyone would go to those extremes to see an entertainer plus with 14 tattoos she is lucky she has a husband. I think she needs to take some of her money and see a psychiatrist.”

“There are two things wrong with this story. First, that this woman will disfigure herself for a couple of tickets to see an aging pop star, and second, that C100 would sponsor such a thing. Unbelievable. Shows very bad judgement on both their parts. And the tattoo is very poorly done and looks nothing like Sir Elton. I felt really embarrassed for her, and really ticked off at C100 for their juvenile behaviour.”

“C100 is a crazy radio station and this woman’s behavior fits right in. Me thinks you need to get a life…… “

God damn it.

[NOLA.com] In the latest edition of Tattoos v. School Board, the St. John the Baptist Parish School Board in New Orleans is seeking to ban “visible lewd and gang-related tattoos,” which doesn’t actually sound the like worst idea ever. Sure, it’s problematic because terms like “lewd” and “gang-related” are certainly open to interpretation: Is a traditional pin-up girl “lewd”? Should a tattoo referencing one’s neighborhood qualify as “gang-related”? And as well, some may suggest that prohibiting tattoos of any kind is some sort of violation, constitutional or otherwise. But at the same time … it’s high school. Banning tattoos and piercings is silly, but, as with any venue that relies on a sense of decorum to maintain some semblance of order, I can’t quite disagree with measures that might cut down on idiotic gang violence. As long as it’s not a single figurehead making the decisions — a committee of peers, perhaps?

[NYPost.com] It seriously seems like there’s a tattoo-related story coming out of the Republican presidential campaign every other day, does it not? This is one is even more boring than usual, though. Meghan McCain was overheard talking to her editor about getting a new tattoo! She’s already got a blue star tattooed on her foot, and her editor has 11 tattoos of his own! McCain said she would wait, however, until after the election to get new work done, out of respect to her father, who, for five-and-a-half years in Vietnam, couldn’t get a tattoo.

We poked some fun at Levi Johnston and his “Bristol” tattoo, but, unsurprisingly, the “bad luck” meme associated with getting a lover’s name tattooed on you is hardly known across the board. Donald G. McNeil, Jr., a New York Times reporter, just learned about his doomed, damned fate upon getting a ring-finger tattoo in lieu of wearing a wedding band:

Three years ago, I had a long argument with my intended. Having seen in Africa the effects of the world diamond cartel, I said I would buy her a ring with any stone she liked, as long as it was not a diamond. That was fine by her.

I also said I wouldn’t wear a wedding band. That was not fine. [...]

“It’s an important physical symbol of commitment,” she said.

I retorted, “If you want that, why don’t you just tattoo your name on.” I suggested a gluteal autograph.

She responded, “Because by the time any other woman saw it, you would already have betrayed me. But if you want to tattoo it on your finger, fine.”

Isn’t it always the case? Calling her bluff, though, McNeil ended up going to a tattoo shop in the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan and, after having been talked out of getting his wife’s full name (in eight-point font, no less), he was convinced that getting her initials in a stylized script would do the trick. During the sitting, he was filled in on the mistake he’d just made:

The artist in the next booth came over to kibbitz and burst out laughing. “A wedding ring? Tattoos are permanent, you know.”

Cynic, I thought. I was 52, I said, and didn’t plan a third marriage. And if it happened, and laser removal failed, I could cover it with a gang tat. The Pathetic Old Gits or something.

As luck would have it though, his wife, though shocked, loved it. (Some of his children, not so much.) What he didn’t realize until later on, however, was that this gesture was by no means unique, and that, in fact, he now shared a trait with some of the most vapid and irritating celebrities Hollywood has to offer.

Pamela Anderson had Tommy Lee’s name tattooed on her ring finger after their 1995 wedding. Until he betrayed her, after which she altered it to “Mommy.” He’d had hers tattooed on his penis. Classy.

Since then I’ve been painfully alert to this microtrend. An article on about.com described it as “an option for doctors and mechanics.”

And squinting at a cover of People magazine, I was pretty sure I read “Linda” on Hulk Hogan’s finger. The article, which didn’t mention it, was about his divorce.

Last year, Téa Leoni and David Duchovny had theirs done for their 10th anniversary. I admire their acting. He just entered rehab for sex addiction.

And recently, I blundered onto a Web site, AmIAnnoying.com. It lists permanently wedding-banded celebrities: Kathy Griffin, Ashlee Simpson, Jenna Jameson, Howard Stern.

Yikes. But hey, look on the bright side, Don: The Pathetic Old Gits will always love you.

Maybe it’s elitism or maybe it’s a certain sort of understandable (and indeed forgivable) obstinacy that comes along with having been part of a particular culture for a long time (or having been immersed in a long-standing culture to the extent that one feels as if they had been there all along), but the fairly recent and widespread commodification of body modification (though mostly tattoos) sits incredibly poorly with most members of the community who were present before Miami Ink ever aired, or who joined afterward but felt retroactively slighted by that sort of supposedly crass and exploitative commercialism. And that’s fine, to an extent. Tattooing has always been a markedly different phenomenon than, say, fitness or cooking shows, but it’s a phenomenon nonetheless, and with acceptance comes a geometric level of growth. Not even a few years ago, what are the chances that the opening of a tattoo shop would have warranted a rather large newspaper feature?

The shop, Windy City Ink, 166 W. Division St., opened on Aug. 13. Owner Gary Parisi said he could not comment on which network would be airing the show but expects to start filming in the next few months. Windy City also has flat-screen digital catalogs and plans to open up a laser tattoo removal shop next door-expensive endeavors most tattoo shops won’t invest in. [...]

The shop is open until 2 a.m., and Parisi said customers can bring in iPods or MP3 players to play. Though many shops have a private room or two, it’s rare to have curtains hanging around every station, like Windy City does.

But what may be unique to this Chicago shop are the flat-screen catalogues which should be installed by Sept. 20. While other Chicago shops have “flashracks” to look through designs, Parisi said, the flat-screens are clean, efficient, fast and categorized.

Jerrett Querubin, 24, who was flown in by Parisi from Albuquerque, N.M. to finish his apprenticeship, said Windy City’s goal is to be a high-class tattoo shop, almost like a salon. But Parisi decided to open early because he could still do business while doing construction, he said. The staff is still working toward their goal of making the shop immaculate and professional.

That tattoo shop owners are embracing the role of tattoo removal as a means of enhancing work rather than running counter to their profession is impressive enough, but to acknowledge the practice as good business as well speaks to a sort of sea change, and the argument could be made this kind of forward momentum is due partially to the aforementioned commodification. Though Venus and others have been ahead of the curve when it comes to envisioning body modification as a service worthy of the “spa treatment,” this Windy City Ink shop seems like it could be indicative of the next great step toward mainstream acceptance, and really, what does the average tattooed person have to lose by visiting a shop that is also a tightly run organization with top of the line equipment and a grown-up business model? The shop will, after all, offer its employees health benefits and all the dressings that come along with a real career.

But then maybe this isn’t indicative of anything at all, it is an anomaly and all it proves is that a shop like Windy City Ink is a good place to film a television show.

In one advertisement for the shop they have been doing every weekend since opening, girls wearing body paint promote the shop with fliers at bars.

“The girls are completely naked,” Parisi said. “It’s the first thing you’re going to remember when you wake up in the morning. Even if you were drunk, you’ll pull out the card and think, ‘Where did I get this from? Oh yeah, there was this girl naked as hell with big t—–s flappin’ around.’”

The truth is probably somewhere in between — that tattooing and body modification being thought of as fields in which a person could realistically work without fear for the future, and stamping out the idea of becoming a piercer as a fall-back plan when society at large isn’t ready for your full facial tattoo, these are undeniably good things. And maybe for these to become proper mandates, maybe that does require a small amount of soul-selling, but it’s worth it, isn’t it?

What do you think?

This video is from January, but it’s new to us! NBA players with tattoos are nothing new, but Rashad McCants is a bit different. For one, he’s an unabashed poet who publishes his pieces on his Web site, but beyond that, he takes his tattoos — and indeed, tattoos in general — very seriously. He writes about his at length:

My greatest analogy for tattoos is that life is pain. The new challenges you encounter in life present a type of pain that could make a person give up. The moment you feel the discomfort, you divert to what’s comfortable and less painful. But a tattoo makes it all mental. Separating the mind from body and focusing on the outcome of the challenge. The pain never lasts forever — it’s just temporary. In life, going through bad times also means good times are soon to follow. The moment you decide not to fight the bad times, everything turns around for you. And the outcome is more satisfying then ever.

That’s the same with a tattoo. It hurts like hell the moment that needle touches your skin. And it continues to hurt until its done. And even a couple days after. But, just as with life’s trials and tribulations, the pain subsides and the outcome is everlasting. There is nothing like a fresh tattoo. The look of it. The feel of it. Knowing that it hurt so bad, and you wanted to quit.

In the video, McCants is followed around during a photo shoot for Inked Magazine, and offers even more about what tattooing means to him:

At some point, a blanket no-tattoos policy will almost certainly compromise your ability to hire the talent you need, and it would appear to move against a general trend to be more tolerant of tattoos. Educational level and social status no longer predict who has body art. The young financial officer who handles your business banking may have a Celtic symbol on her ankle. The lawyer who works your case may simply take out his nose ring when he goes to court.

As a result, many major employers have revised their tattoo policies, making them more lenient. Disney is good example. After polling the people who visit their theme parks and finding little objection, the company lifted tattoo restrictions. Faced with talent shortages, many hospitals have moved from a no tattoo policy, to a “no highly visible tattoos” stance.

This may seem like old news — indeed, it certainly is — but it’s undeniably positive and surprisingly progressive. Of course, the trend is not as far-reaching as some would hope:

That said, the professionals who responded to the SHRM survey made it clear that body art still leads to stereotyping. Furthermore, in a 2007 survey 85% of respondents said that tattoos and body piercings impede a person’s chances of finding a job.

Now, as someone who often laments the fact that he was born in an era in which wearing a three-piece suit at all times isn’t quite necessary, I personally love the cognitive dissonance of seeing an impeccably dressed person with hints of tattoos peeking out from behind cuffs and collars. There should be some sort of decorum when it comes to the way one dresses for work, but I don’t think a dress code and body modification are irreconcilable, either. My favorite take on this comes from Keith Alexander, who was, among many other things, a heavily tattooed ball-breaker that flourished in marketing and advertising:

[...] the older generations [are] dying off and the younger generations [are] coming up, and the majority of them have [tattoo] work. [...] So, look, we’ve reached critical mass as far as public awareness goes: Everybody knows there’s people like us and people crazier than us doing these things. So, they’re aware of it, it’s just a matter of your resumé and experience being able to back it up. I don’t think that, given the choice between a person who is somewhat qualified and not pierced or tattooed and a person who is extremely qualified and pierced and tattooed, I think that the business environment is such these days that you have to make the right choice to go for the person that’s best for the job, visible work or not.

[...]

So it’s really … I hear so many people just whining about, “My quote-unquote mods keep me out of jobs,” and I really don’t buy into that. If you have a full facial tattoo and you got it when you were 16 and it’s shitty art, then maybe that is working against you, but I don’t have much sympathy for you. So again, I’ve never really had a problem, it’s always just a matter of setting the goal and going for it. I’ve counseled and helped so many of my friends with going through transitions like that because I’ve done it so many times, and the advice that I give them is to just pick what you want to do and go for it.

[...]

The best thing to do is just live your life and lead by example. You know, that’s what I like to do; I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in big presentations, I’ve just given a great presentation, everyone’s just kind of blown away, and then I roll up my sleeves and people are like, “Holy shit, that’s a lot of work,” and you know, I’m totally aware of when I do it, how I do it, why I’m doing it, and so on. So you just have to set an example by the way you live your life.