In follow-up to the conversation on in what context (if any) a “Hitler tattoo” is appropriate, Lane Jensen (iam:inksation) asks,
Does a shop have a moral obligation to turn away serial killer portraits the same way they turn away racist tattoos?
Mike Gibson at Dragon FX who did these Richard Ramirez (the Nightstalker) and Albert Fish portrait tattoos says, “no”.
Comments
268 responses to “Where should the line be drawn?”
I know a girl with an Ed Gein tattoo, and really, it just makes her look stupid to me.
I know a girl with an Ed Gein tattoo, and really, it just makes her look stupid to me.
Dani you need to read The Gentle Swastika. To oversimplify, right and left facing Swastikas represent yin and yang energies in the Far East. It’s different in every culture, and the Swastika shows up in many ancient cultures.
And to some you others: shame on you for calling other people’s tattoo choices stupid. You should keep in mind that someone out there probably thinks your choices are stupid too!
Dani you need to read The Gentle Swastika. To oversimplify, right and left facing Swastikas represent yin and yang energies in the Far East. It’s different in every culture, and the Swastika shows up in many ancient cultures.
And to some you others: shame on you for calling other people’s tattoo choices stupid. You should keep in mind that someone out there probably thinks your choices are stupid too!
Dani you need to read The Gentle Swastika. To oversimplify, right and left facing Swastikas represent yin and yang energies in the Far East. It’s different in every culture, and the Swastika shows up in many ancient cultures.
And to some you others: shame on you for calling other people’s tattoo choices stupid. You should keep in mind that someone out there probably thinks your choices are stupid too!
Dani you need to read The Gentle Swastika. To oversimplify, right and left facing Swastikas represent yin and yang energies in the Far East. It’s different in every culture, and the Swastika shows up in many ancient cultures.
And to some you others: shame on you for calling other people’s tattoo choices stupid. You should keep in mind that someone out there probably thinks your choices are stupid too!
I think it’s the artist’s decision. I mean – it’s his/her artwork. If he/she didn’t want to do it, make the person go find someone else.
I understand the fascination of serial killers. My dad is a shrink so we often discuss the mental disorders of such – quite interesting. However, I (personally here) wouldn’t get a tattoo of one. It’s the mental disorder that’s interesting to me – not a fascination with the person or the acts. Quite frankly, Albert Fish was the only serial killer that I actually got sick reading about. I mean heaving and whatnot.
I think it’s the artist’s decision. I mean – it’s his/her artwork. If he/she didn’t want to do it, make the person go find someone else.
I understand the fascination of serial killers. My dad is a shrink so we often discuss the mental disorders of such – quite interesting. However, I (personally here) wouldn’t get a tattoo of one. It’s the mental disorder that’s interesting to me – not a fascination with the person or the acts. Quite frankly, Albert Fish was the only serial killer that I actually got sick reading about. I mean heaving and whatnot.
I think it’s the artist’s decision. I mean – it’s his/her artwork. If he/she didn’t want to do it, make the person go find someone else.
I understand the fascination of serial killers. My dad is a shrink so we often discuss the mental disorders of such – quite interesting. However, I (personally here) wouldn’t get a tattoo of one. It’s the mental disorder that’s interesting to me – not a fascination with the person or the acts. Quite frankly, Albert Fish was the only serial killer that I actually got sick reading about. I mean heaving and whatnot.
I think it’s the artist’s decision. I mean – it’s his/her artwork. If he/she didn’t want to do it, make the person go find someone else.
I understand the fascination of serial killers. My dad is a shrink so we often discuss the mental disorders of such – quite interesting. However, I (personally here) wouldn’t get a tattoo of one. It’s the mental disorder that’s interesting to me – not a fascination with the person or the acts. Quite frankly, Albert Fish was the only serial killer that I actually got sick reading about. I mean heaving and whatnot.
I think tattoo artists should only minimally turn down people.
Because things will start to suck if everyone gets turned down.
It’s impossible to avoid offending others.
I think we should be more open-minded.
Ask questions before accusations are made, or insults (or fists) are thrown.
Freedom of speech and expression.
I know that one day, I’ll probably get tattoos that offend people, that others think are stupid, and maybe even that someone or two wants to beat me up for.
I can’t help that. I’m not here to please everyone.
We all have a right to modify ourselves, and different people will do it in different ways.
Although personally, I don’t really think it’s a good thing to put murders/serial-killers on your skin.
Because someone in my family was killed, and if I saw a tattoo of him on someone, It’d probably hurt me.
I’m against censorship, but I definitely understand tattoo artists having certain beliefs/convictions, morals/ethics, and not wanting to tattoo certain things.
My mom worked with a criminal lawyer and he represented a child molestor, and she refused to help out.
Tattoo artists have the right to refuse just as much as people have the right to be modified with anything on their body.
If a tattoo artist doesn’t want to do it, go somewhere else… and if no one will do it, maybe you should rethink it, eh?
Stay open-minded. Controversy is abound.
I think tattoo artists should only minimally turn down people.
Because things will start to suck if everyone gets turned down.
It’s impossible to avoid offending others.
I think we should be more open-minded.
Ask questions before accusations are made, or insults (or fists) are thrown.
Freedom of speech and expression.
I know that one day, I’ll probably get tattoos that offend people, that others think are stupid, and maybe even that someone or two wants to beat me up for.
I can’t help that. I’m not here to please everyone.
We all have a right to modify ourselves, and different people will do it in different ways.
Although personally, I don’t really think it’s a good thing to put murders/serial-killers on your skin.
Because someone in my family was killed, and if I saw a tattoo of him on someone, It’d probably hurt me.
I’m against censorship, but I definitely understand tattoo artists having certain beliefs/convictions, morals/ethics, and not wanting to tattoo certain things.
My mom worked with a criminal lawyer and he represented a child molestor, and she refused to help out.
Tattoo artists have the right to refuse just as much as people have the right to be modified with anything on their body.
If a tattoo artist doesn’t want to do it, go somewhere else… and if no one will do it, maybe you should rethink it, eh?
Stay open-minded. Controversy is abound.
I think tattoo artists should only minimally turn down people.
Because things will start to suck if everyone gets turned down.
It’s impossible to avoid offending others.
I think we should be more open-minded.
Ask questions before accusations are made, or insults (or fists) are thrown.
Freedom of speech and expression.
I know that one day, I’ll probably get tattoos that offend people, that others think are stupid, and maybe even that someone or two wants to beat me up for.
I can’t help that. I’m not here to please everyone.
We all have a right to modify ourselves, and different people will do it in different ways.
Although personally, I don’t really think it’s a good thing to put murders/serial-killers on your skin.
Because someone in my family was killed, and if I saw a tattoo of him on someone, It’d probably hurt me.
I’m against censorship, but I definitely understand tattoo artists having certain beliefs/convictions, morals/ethics, and not wanting to tattoo certain things.
My mom worked with a criminal lawyer and he represented a child molestor, and she refused to help out.
Tattoo artists have the right to refuse just as much as people have the right to be modified with anything on their body.
If a tattoo artist doesn’t want to do it, go somewhere else… and if no one will do it, maybe you should rethink it, eh?
Stay open-minded. Controversy is abound.
I think tattoo artists should only minimally turn down people.
Because things will start to suck if everyone gets turned down.
It’s impossible to avoid offending others.
I think we should be more open-minded.
Ask questions before accusations are made, or insults (or fists) are thrown.
Freedom of speech and expression.
I know that one day, I’ll probably get tattoos that offend people, that others think are stupid, and maybe even that someone or two wants to beat me up for.
I can’t help that. I’m not here to please everyone.
We all have a right to modify ourselves, and different people will do it in different ways.
Although personally, I don’t really think it’s a good thing to put murders/serial-killers on your skin.
Because someone in my family was killed, and if I saw a tattoo of him on someone, It’d probably hurt me.
I’m against censorship, but I definitely understand tattoo artists having certain beliefs/convictions, morals/ethics, and not wanting to tattoo certain things.
My mom worked with a criminal lawyer and he represented a child molestor, and she refused to help out.
Tattoo artists have the right to refuse just as much as people have the right to be modified with anything on their body.
If a tattoo artist doesn’t want to do it, go somewhere else… and if no one will do it, maybe you should rethink it, eh?
Stay open-minded. Controversy is abound.
I’m very split; on one had, a tattoo artist should of course have the right to turn down anything they want.
However, the flip side of the coin is that it can be very difficult to find a good artist for controversial work. For example, in the past especially, it was very difficult to find top-quality artists willing to tattoo hands and faces. One of my more explicit tattoos (Tom of Finland style homoerotic CBT-themed tattoos; in progress) took some convincing as well because the artist didn’t want to get known as “the ball torture guy”…
I’m very split; on one had, a tattoo artist should of course have the right to turn down anything they want.
However, the flip side of the coin is that it can be very difficult to find a good artist for controversial work. For example, in the past especially, it was very difficult to find top-quality artists willing to tattoo hands and faces. One of my more explicit tattoos (Tom of Finland style homoerotic CBT-themed tattoos; in progress) took some convincing as well because the artist didn’t want to get known as “the ball torture guy”…
I’m very split; on one had, a tattoo artist should of course have the right to turn down anything they want.
However, the flip side of the coin is that it can be very difficult to find a good artist for controversial work. For example, in the past especially, it was very difficult to find top-quality artists willing to tattoo hands and faces. One of my more explicit tattoos (Tom of Finland style homoerotic CBT-themed tattoos; in progress) took some convincing as well because the artist didn’t want to get known as “the ball torture guy”…
I’m very split; on one had, a tattoo artist should of course have the right to turn down anything they want.
However, the flip side of the coin is that it can be very difficult to find a good artist for controversial work. For example, in the past especially, it was very difficult to find top-quality artists willing to tattoo hands and faces. One of my more explicit tattoos (Tom of Finland style homoerotic CBT-themed tattoos; in progress) took some convincing as well because the artist didn’t want to get known as “the ball torture guy”…
for me,it would have to be what the tattoo represents to the person that would decide whether i slapped them in the head or not…i actually like richard ramirez but,i wouldn’t be willing to get a tattoo of the guy on me,that woulod disturb me!
for me,it would have to be what the tattoo represents to the person that would decide whether i slapped them in the head or not…i actually like richard ramirez but,i wouldn’t be willing to get a tattoo of the guy on me,that woulod disturb me!
for me,it would have to be what the tattoo represents to the person that would decide whether i slapped them in the head or not…i actually like richard ramirez but,i wouldn’t be willing to get a tattoo of the guy on me,that woulod disturb me!
for me,it would have to be what the tattoo represents to the person that would decide whether i slapped them in the head or not…i actually like richard ramirez but,i wouldn’t be willing to get a tattoo of the guy on me,that woulod disturb me!
I think it’s the artist’s right to decide what they do and don’t want to ink; would you bitchslap a painter if they turned down your commission for a CBT scene? Probably not. Feel free to think less of the artist, or not patronize them, but in the end I’d rather they had the choice to turn down work they don’t feel comfortable doing.
I think it’s the artist’s right to decide what they do and don’t want to ink; would you bitchslap a painter if they turned down your commission for a CBT scene? Probably not. Feel free to think less of the artist, or not patronize them, but in the end I’d rather they had the choice to turn down work they don’t feel comfortable doing.
I think it’s the artist’s right to decide what they do and don’t want to ink; would you bitchslap a painter if they turned down your commission for a CBT scene? Probably not. Feel free to think less of the artist, or not patronize them, but in the end I’d rather they had the choice to turn down work they don’t feel comfortable doing.
I think it’s the artist’s right to decide what they do and don’t want to ink; would you bitchslap a painter if they turned down your commission for a CBT scene? Probably not. Feel free to think less of the artist, or not patronize them, but in the end I’d rather they had the choice to turn down work they don’t feel comfortable doing.
First and foremost the pieces are amazing.
Second, this has become a rather complex discussion so Iâll deal with the actual question first before commenting on what has been said in the past eleventy posts. Shannon, your question has a simple answer â no. Artists are artists no matter the medium of expression. People get so wrapped up in concern of their own rights and what they want that they forget that tattoo artists have the exact same ones. If they donât want their name attached to something itâs completely their right to deny service – whether you continue to support their shop is yours.
As for the âuse of violenceâ? comment I would agree that fighting is ridicules in most circumstances. However, I would also have to agree with the individuals who stated that they would be hurt by or would hurt a person with such a tattoo if a loved one was harmed by such an individual (no matter how unlikely). For those in Southern Ontario, imagine the controversy surrounding a Karla Homolka or Paul Bernardo tattoo and they didnât even kill many people. Iâm not saying that violence would be acceptable, I just have the rational to admit that I donât know how I would react. Calling someone shallow for showing genuine emotion seems a bit uncalled for.
As for the justification of the tattoos through fascination of the acts or mere interest in the figure, it works as long as you believe it applies to all areas. Is it ok for those who are interested in terrorism to get images of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Theodore Kaczynski or Timothy McVeigh done, civil rights students to get images of James Earl Ray, or those involved politics to get images of Lee Harvey Oswald? Or like so many things does it have to do with the context surrounding it?
I agree that we canât worry about every single person out there and offending their delicate sensibilities. I also understand that âpoor tasteâ? / âoffensiveâ? are subjective terms. Morals, values, ethics, all vary radically right down to a person to person level (obviously) so questions like this will never really reach a consensus. WE can only leave it up to the artist / client to make the call and deal with the after effects of how controversial (hate, race, sexual) tattoos will effect their business / life.
I would go on but I already feel the need to apologize for this novel.
First and foremost the pieces are amazing.
Second, this has become a rather complex discussion so Iâll deal with the actual question first before commenting on what has been said in the past eleventy posts. Shannon, your question has a simple answer â no. Artists are artists no matter the medium of expression. People get so wrapped up in concern of their own rights and what they want that they forget that tattoo artists have the exact same ones. If they donât want their name attached to something itâs completely their right to deny service – whether you continue to support their shop is yours.
As for the âuse of violenceâ? comment I would agree that fighting is ridicules in most circumstances. However, I would also have to agree with the individuals who stated that they would be hurt by or would hurt a person with such a tattoo if a loved one was harmed by such an individual (no matter how unlikely). For those in Southern Ontario, imagine the controversy surrounding a Karla Homolka or Paul Bernardo tattoo and they didnât even kill many people. Iâm not saying that violence would be acceptable, I just have the rational to admit that I donât know how I would react. Calling someone shallow for showing genuine emotion seems a bit uncalled for.
As for the justification of the tattoos through fascination of the acts or mere interest in the figure, it works as long as you believe it applies to all areas. Is it ok for those who are interested in terrorism to get images of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Theodore Kaczynski or Timothy McVeigh done, civil rights students to get images of James Earl Ray, or those involved politics to get images of Lee Harvey Oswald? Or like so many things does it have to do with the context surrounding it?
I agree that we canât worry about every single person out there and offending their delicate sensibilities. I also understand that âpoor tasteâ? / âoffensiveâ? are subjective terms. Morals, values, ethics, all vary radically right down to a person to person level (obviously) so questions like this will never really reach a consensus. WE can only leave it up to the artist / client to make the call and deal with the after effects of how controversial (hate, race, sexual) tattoos will effect their business / life.
I would go on but I already feel the need to apologize for this novel.
First and foremost the pieces are amazing.
Second, this has become a rather complex discussion so Iâll deal with the actual question first before commenting on what has been said in the past eleventy posts. Shannon, your question has a simple answer â no. Artists are artists no matter the medium of expression. People get so wrapped up in concern of their own rights and what they want that they forget that tattoo artists have the exact same ones. If they donât want their name attached to something itâs completely their right to deny service – whether you continue to support their shop is yours.
As for the âuse of violenceâ? comment I would agree that fighting is ridicules in most circumstances. However, I would also have to agree with the individuals who stated that they would be hurt by or would hurt a person with such a tattoo if a loved one was harmed by such an individual (no matter how unlikely). For those in Southern Ontario, imagine the controversy surrounding a Karla Homolka or Paul Bernardo tattoo and they didnât even kill many people. Iâm not saying that violence would be acceptable, I just have the rational to admit that I donât know how I would react. Calling someone shallow for showing genuine emotion seems a bit uncalled for.
As for the justification of the tattoos through fascination of the acts or mere interest in the figure, it works as long as you believe it applies to all areas. Is it ok for those who are interested in terrorism to get images of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Theodore Kaczynski or Timothy McVeigh done, civil rights students to get images of James Earl Ray, or those involved politics to get images of Lee Harvey Oswald? Or like so many things does it have to do with the context surrounding it?
I agree that we canât worry about every single person out there and offending their delicate sensibilities. I also understand that âpoor tasteâ? / âoffensiveâ? are subjective terms. Morals, values, ethics, all vary radically right down to a person to person level (obviously) so questions like this will never really reach a consensus. WE can only leave it up to the artist / client to make the call and deal with the after effects of how controversial (hate, race, sexual) tattoos will effect their business / life.
I would go on but I already feel the need to apologize for this novel.
First and foremost the pieces are amazing.
Second, this has become a rather complex discussion so Iâll deal with the actual question first before commenting on what has been said in the past eleventy posts. Shannon, your question has a simple answer â no. Artists are artists no matter the medium of expression. People get so wrapped up in concern of their own rights and what they want that they forget that tattoo artists have the exact same ones. If they donât want their name attached to something itâs completely their right to deny service – whether you continue to support their shop is yours.
As for the âuse of violenceâ? comment I would agree that fighting is ridicules in most circumstances. However, I would also have to agree with the individuals who stated that they would be hurt by or would hurt a person with such a tattoo if a loved one was harmed by such an individual (no matter how unlikely). For those in Southern Ontario, imagine the controversy surrounding a Karla Homolka or Paul Bernardo tattoo and they didnât even kill many people. Iâm not saying that violence would be acceptable, I just have the rational to admit that I donât know how I would react. Calling someone shallow for showing genuine emotion seems a bit uncalled for.
As for the justification of the tattoos through fascination of the acts or mere interest in the figure, it works as long as you believe it applies to all areas. Is it ok for those who are interested in terrorism to get images of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Theodore Kaczynski or Timothy McVeigh done, civil rights students to get images of James Earl Ray, or those involved politics to get images of Lee Harvey Oswald? Or like so many things does it have to do with the context surrounding it?
I agree that we canât worry about every single person out there and offending their delicate sensibilities. I also understand that âpoor tasteâ? / âoffensiveâ? are subjective terms. Morals, values, ethics, all vary radically right down to a person to person level (obviously) so questions like this will never really reach a consensus. WE can only leave it up to the artist / client to make the call and deal with the after effects of how controversial (hate, race, sexual) tattoos will effect their business / life.
I would go on but I already feel the need to apologize for this novel.
Nicely said Duck. I agree with much of what you said. You just spared everybody from my own essay 🙂
Nicely said Duck. I agree with much of what you said. You just spared everybody from my own essay 🙂
Nicely said Duck. I agree with much of what you said. You just spared everybody from my own essay 🙂
Nicely said Duck. I agree with much of what you said. You just spared everybody from my own essay 🙂
Butt-Rash, you do realize that it’s more complicated than “oh that guy has Fish on his arm! Let’s kick his ass”, right?
I have an entry about this from some time ago, if you’re that interested, I’m not.
Butt-Rash, you do realize that it’s more complicated than “oh that guy has Fish on his arm! Let’s kick his ass”, right?
I have an entry about this from some time ago, if you’re that interested, I’m not.
Butt-Rash, you do realize that it’s more complicated than “oh that guy has Fish on his arm! Let’s kick his ass”, right?
I have an entry about this from some time ago, if you’re that interested, I’m not.
Butt-Rash, you do realize that it’s more complicated than “oh that guy has Fish on his arm! Let’s kick his ass”, right?
I have an entry about this from some time ago, if you’re that interested, I’m not.
But someone tell me, why get that on your body? Yes, I realize that we have freedom of expression as individuals, which Im all for, but why choose a serial killer?
Those people murdered others… raped, tortured, skinned them and made them into lamp shades. If someone raped and brutally murded, say.. your mother, and someone tattooed their portrait on them, wouldnt you be a bit offended?
Im a HUGE art fan, I really am, but it just seems insensitive to me.
But someone tell me, why get that on your body? Yes, I realize that we have freedom of expression as individuals, which Im all for, but why choose a serial killer?
Those people murdered others… raped, tortured, skinned them and made them into lamp shades. If someone raped and brutally murded, say.. your mother, and someone tattooed their portrait on them, wouldnt you be a bit offended?
Im a HUGE art fan, I really am, but it just seems insensitive to me.
But someone tell me, why get that on your body? Yes, I realize that we have freedom of expression as individuals, which Im all for, but why choose a serial killer?
Those people murdered others… raped, tortured, skinned them and made them into lamp shades. If someone raped and brutally murded, say.. your mother, and someone tattooed their portrait on them, wouldnt you be a bit offended?
Im a HUGE art fan, I really am, but it just seems insensitive to me.
But someone tell me, why get that on your body? Yes, I realize that we have freedom of expression as individuals, which Im all for, but why choose a serial killer?
Those people murdered others… raped, tortured, skinned them and made them into lamp shades. If someone raped and brutally murded, say.. your mother, and someone tattooed their portrait on them, wouldnt you be a bit offended?
Im a HUGE art fan, I really am, but it just seems insensitive to me.
I’m not one to judge other peoples’ decisions, but I will.
Such tattoos are TACKY and TASTELESS. What’s the point? Do the wearers of these tattoos idolize these monsters? If so, that’s pretty lame. Very lame.
You want an evil tattoo? Great. There are more than enough evil fictional characters to choose from. But glorifying somebody who did monstrous things to human beings is horrible.
I think I’ll get an ENRON tattoo.
I’m not one to judge other peoples’ decisions, but I will.
Such tattoos are TACKY and TASTELESS. What’s the point? Do the wearers of these tattoos idolize these monsters? If so, that’s pretty lame. Very lame.
You want an evil tattoo? Great. There are more than enough evil fictional characters to choose from. But glorifying somebody who did monstrous things to human beings is horrible.
I think I’ll get an ENRON tattoo.
I’m not one to judge other peoples’ decisions, but I will.
Such tattoos are TACKY and TASTELESS. What’s the point? Do the wearers of these tattoos idolize these monsters? If so, that’s pretty lame. Very lame.
You want an evil tattoo? Great. There are more than enough evil fictional characters to choose from. But glorifying somebody who did monstrous things to human beings is horrible.
I think I’ll get an ENRON tattoo.
I’m not one to judge other peoples’ decisions, but I will.
Such tattoos are TACKY and TASTELESS. What’s the point? Do the wearers of these tattoos idolize these monsters? If so, that’s pretty lame. Very lame.
You want an evil tattoo? Great. There are more than enough evil fictional characters to choose from. But glorifying somebody who did monstrous things to human beings is horrible.
I think I’ll get an ENRON tattoo.
Butt-Rash, You realise I said if someone had hurt my daughter and there was someone wearing a tattoo of that guy I would beat them right? Not just a random serial killer. I think people should be able to get what they want, and I am not easily offended. But if you had a child and they were killed/raped/whatever and you saw somebody with a tattoo memorialising the person that did it, theres something seriously wrong with you if you wouldn’t be pissed off.
Butt-Rash, You realise I said if someone had hurt my daughter and there was someone wearing a tattoo of that guy I would beat them right? Not just a random serial killer. I think people should be able to get what they want, and I am not easily offended. But if you had a child and they were killed/raped/whatever and you saw somebody with a tattoo memorialising the person that did it, theres something seriously wrong with you if you wouldn’t be pissed off.
Butt-Rash, You realise I said if someone had hurt my daughter and there was someone wearing a tattoo of that guy I would beat them right? Not just a random serial killer. I think people should be able to get what they want, and I am not easily offended. But if you had a child and they were killed/raped/whatever and you saw somebody with a tattoo memorialising the person that did it, theres something seriously wrong with you if you wouldn’t be pissed off.
Butt-Rash, You realise I said if someone had hurt my daughter and there was someone wearing a tattoo of that guy I would beat them right? Not just a random serial killer. I think people should be able to get what they want, and I am not easily offended. But if you had a child and they were killed/raped/whatever and you saw somebody with a tattoo memorialising the person that did it, theres something seriously wrong with you if you wouldn’t be pissed off.