A tattooed person suspends from hooks, laying flat, one leg higher than the other. Their head is back, and they seem to be smiling, dark hair dangling like an anime character.

Category: Features

  • Beauty: Eye of the Beholder? – Fakir Rants & Raves

    Beauty: Eye of the Beholder?

    “The body belongs to the spirit that lives inside. And to no one else.”

    Greetings

    Welcome to my new column. It’s a genuine pleasure to be a contributor to BME online news for “we the alternative people”. After fifty years of research, my own personal explorations and the mentoring of hundreds of others, I feel obligated to share with all those special persons “who hear the sound of a different drummer.” So every month now, look for this column where I will bring you a mix of news, views and hopefully information that will empower and help you further your own passions. I welcome challenges and questions to answer in the column. So feel free to write me about whatever moves you. As an “old dad” in the body modification movement, I hope to offer this column as a clearing house for new ideas/adventures and hopefully a place to moderate some of the conflicting views that often plague us.

    The subject of this first column is inspired by my recent experience with a new television show now in production. The show is a series being called Eye of the Beholder in which the host, Serena Yang, is traveling all over the world to film and interview people who are different — from the moko mark revival devotees of New Zealand to gothic corset wearers in San Francisco to body piercing and tattoo fans in the U.S., Canada and Europe. The series, which will air on Discovery Channel in 2004, has an interesting and intelligent slant. Its theme is exploration of the question: What is Beauty?

    Serena interviewed me in depth in May 2003. She will continue interviewing folks of our ilk at the coming APP conference in Las Vegas. She is a sharp and perceptive interviewer who honed her skills interviewing such celebrities as B.B King, Carlos Santana, Ravi Shankar, Martin Scorsese, Robert DeNiro, Robert Redford, Harrison Ford and Sean Penn among others. She has a passion to ask why one does what they do. She has said of herself, “the value of listening to these people is a continuing education for me … the reward is coming away from each person with a wider vision of the times we live in, the issues we need to explore and the choices we can make.”

    So with that introduction, I spoke at length to Serena about Modern Primitives, body modification, body rituals, spirituality and similar topics during my May piercing school. She asked good questions and many of them started my mental processes whirling. I began to ask myself questions like: “what really differentiates the visual impact of one body alteration from another”, or “is there a universal, cross-cultural way to gauge the significance of a beauty ideal”? After the interview, Serena came very close to surrendering to our persistent Intensive instructors about having her nipples pierced. We’ll get her next time!


    Intensives instructor Tod Almighty meets Serena Yang of Discovery Channel

    Tod tries to convince Serena to get her nipples pierced.

    For my next shoot with Discovery Channel, at Dark Garden Corsets, Serena did allow herself to get involved in a bodymod. Fakir laced her rapidly into a tiny corset with a twenty-inch waist. She reeled about, spun on high heels, panted and was totally delighted with the sensation and look. She emailed me today:

    "Good to see you again last week and experience your corsets first hand! I am a corset convert now, thanks to you! I've always liked them from a fashion standpoint, but now I can appreciate them on all their myriad levels."

    The Price of Beauty

    Getting down to brass tacks (which are sometimes lovely to sit on), many of us are obsessed with being different, looking different, expressing our differences. Yes? Why are we doing this? What is the payoff? These are the kinds of questions Serena asked me in our interviews. They made me think. What is the Essence of Beauty anyway? What’s the payoff? What are we, or anyone in any other culture, after by making a body alteration?

    First it seems obvious we wish to satisfy our own vision of ourselves, how we look and feel to ourselves. And second, and probably more important, we wish to look “beautiful” to others. Of course we must realize some “others” may have different ideas of what is beautiful and claim ownership of what is not rightfully theirs. For example, take the proposed legislative ban on tongue splitting in Illinois. And we know that most of the “others” in our culture are programmed and conditioned to certain fixed notions that may conflict with our own. And that they often try to take our bodies from us — act like they have the right to claim possession of what is ours for “God” and his emissaries, or parents and spouses, or governmental and correctional agencies, or educational and medical institutions. But we know better. The body belongs to the spirit that lives inside. And to no one else.

    So in context of any immediate or intimate group that accepts the truth that the body belongs to the one living inside it, the payoff often seems to be to “Stand Out in the Crowd”, to be unique, to be special, to be noticed in that group. This part of the “beauty ideal” seems to be universal in all cultures. In many tribal cultures I have studied, certain members of the tribe either volunteered or were selected by elders to be modified. Example: the young males of New Guinea known as Ibitoe whose septums were pierced for large spikes and whose waists were systematically reduced to wasp-like proportions with tight belts. They were special in their communities, honored, revered. Same goes for women in Africa whose lips were pierced and enlarged to hold huge plates. The larger the plate, the more beautiful. And the Padung women of Burma/Thailand with their giraffe necks stretched to ten inches or more.

    So now in the mixed contemporary culture in which we live, there are conflicting standards about beauty and the way it is achieved. On the one hand there is a passion to conform to certain popular beauty ideals by “quick fixes”: injections of botox or collagen, plastic surgery like liposuction or breast implants that make a rapid physical alteration. Or the taking of pills to do this or that with the body without external effort. On the other hand, a different kind of logic rules in those who modify their body in more difficult, more time consuming and more deliberate ways via tattooing, body building, piercing enlargement, corseting and similar practices. I guess that’s most of us. Yes?

    So on a universal scale, what are some of the standards by which mankind has cross-culturally gauged the relative value of beauty? How do we rate beauty’s significance on a scale of 1 to 10? After collecting information on hundreds of examples of body mods in different cultures, including our own subculture, this is what I discovered:

    • In general, the more effort, time, discipline, persistence, patience and physical hardship that was endured to make the alteration, the more precious it is rated, the more it is honored, the more beautiful it is.
    • The more the alteration sets one apart from those surrounding him or her,
      even if others also have the alteration, the higher it is rated in the group which generally prizes rarity.
  • Beauty is perceived more as difference than conformity; when too many members of a group have the same alteration, it drops in value.
  • To illustrate the reality of these principles in contemporary circumstances, here are a few examples. A woman with a sixteen-inch corseted waist is more apt to “stand out” in a crowd than a woman with silicon breast implants (unless they are as big as watermelons). Point is you can’t have that small a waist by taking a pill or a quick slice of the knife. It takes time. Or you have the buff male body builder on the beach. He is always going to draw more admiration than the guy with a fake tan, snappy clothes and plastic surgery. And in our own world of body mods, we often get more and more radical piercings and tattoos so we stand out from others — keep pressing limits to achieve or maintain beauty status within our group.
  • How would you rate these body modifiers on a universal Scale of 1 to 10?

    Erica

    Sheryl

    Fakir

    Value Added

    So far in this column, I have been examining only one aspect of what’s involved with alterations of the body (what I call “Body Play”): a specific aspect labeled BEAUTY. But “beauty” only deals with the aesthetic side of life, the part of us that dwells in the five-sense world, only relevant with other people. How about the deeper side of us that operates in the “invisible world”? How about the inner emotions, feelings, spirit and energy that animates the body? Or going one step further, how about unseen forces and beings that may dwell outside the body and influence or be influenced by what is happening within body? What if body rituals dealing with the unseen world somehow play a bigger role in our life journey than those so obvious to the five senses? Body rituals like cutting, ball dances, suspensions or hook pulling? Or what if our energy added to such a “gift” delivered under hardship to an unseen deity or archetype adds value to the gift in such a way that we receive a very special blessing in return? That’s what they practice in Hindu Culture in body rites and festivals like Thaipusam.

    The aspects of body alteration dealing with unseen forces and energies will be the subject of my next column. It will be called Body Play: State of Grace or Sickness. Again I will focus on the cultural conflicts we are all facing when we give in to our passions.

    Yours for more beauty in the world and less struggle,


    Fakir Musafar
    fakir at bodyplay dot com



    Fakir Musafar is the undisputed father of the Modern Primitives movement and through his work over the past 50 years with PFIQ, Gauntlet, Body Play, and more, he has been one of the key figures in bringing body modification out of the closet in an enlightened and aware fashion.

    For much more information on Fakir and the subjects discussed in this column, be sure to check out his website at www.bodyplay.com. While you’re there you should consider whipping out your PayPal account and getting yourself a signed copy of his amazing book, SPIRIT AND FLESH (now).

    Copyright © 2003 BMEzine.com LLC Requests to republish must be confirmed in writing. For bibliographical purposes this article was first published May 18th, 2003 by BMEzine.com LLC in Tweed, Ontario, Canada.

  • The [Modified] Body Politic – Through the Modified Looking Glass

     
    After his earlier well-received guest column, I’m very happy to announce that Erik Sprague, better known as the Lizardman, has joined the monthly column staff of BME. Here’s to enjoying this first column, and many more to follow,

    BME.com

    The [Modified] Body Politic

    There is currently pending (it has passed the house and is awaiting review in the senate) in the Illinois state legislature a bill that would effectively ban tongue splitting as a procedure. A lot of people might assume that my interest in such legislation derives from my own experience with tongue splitting but, in fact, what I find compelling about this issue are the far more sinister aspects I perceive — namely, the legislation of prejudice and the use of the media’s body modification obsession to promote personal political agendas. In my view, what is at stake here is not really tongue splitting but something far more fundamental: freedom of expression. However, to provide some background on the subject I will provide a brief accounting of my history with the procedure before addressing what I think are really the core issues.

    In 1997 I sought out an oral surgeon and was able to convince him to perform on me a tongue bifurcation using an argon biopsy laser. This was one of the first tongue splittings in modern record (two other individuals using different methods appearing at about the same) and almost certainly the first using the biopsy laser. I immediately began to share my experience and the success of the procedure with the world at large through online resources like BME, SPC, and my own website. I also publicized it through my own live appearances and shows. Soon, a number of people had contacted me and even stayed with me in order to have their tongues split by the same surgeon. Within a year, the procedure had gone from rumor and myth to being one of the more popular “heavy mods” (keeping in mind that popular in this context still means probably less than 3000 people worldwide today – six years later!) A little more than 2 years later I appeared in Time magazine and on Ripley’s Believe It or Not! Tongue splitting was now entering into millions of homes and my touring meant more and more press for the procedure. This was a double edged sword, because as it certainly made more people who might have desired the procedure aware that it existed and was a possibility – it was also just a matter of time before some of those who said “ewww!” when they saw a forked tongue initiated a backlash.

    It happened first in Michigan when a piece of legislation was introduced to ban tongue splitting there. That ban was narrowly defeated. Now, in Illinois we have Rep. David Miller who has authored the following (taken from the Illinois General Assembly Website):

    Synopsis As Introduced
    Amends the Criminal Code of 1961. Prohibits a person other than a licensed physician or dentist from performing tongue splitting. Provides that a physician or dentist authorized to perform tongue splitting may perform tongue splitting on an individual only if there is a therapeutic or clinical basis for performing the procedure on that individual. Makes a first offense a Class A misdemeanor and a second or subsequent offense a Class 4 felony.

    Mr. Miller is a practicing dentist who after seeing an article in which I was pictured (so I am told and was reported in early stories covering the bill) brought one of my images into session along with his draft, obviously playing to shock value. He also came armed with a number of alleged facts, many of which I have spent a great deal of time in interviews about the bill having to correct.

    Mr. Miller asserts that his bill is addressing a health care issue — unqualified, unlicensed practitioners performing a dangerous procedure (tongue splitting). This is perhaps where Miller has done himself a bit of a favor compared to his equally bigoted colleagues in Michigan who described tongue splitting as ‘gross’ and ‘unnatural’. In Michigan this resulted in the legislature being very quickly identified for what it was — an attempt by a group of politicians to legislate into law their own opinions. That bill was defeated mainly because it would have restricted a freedom of expression without grounds. Miller has obscured this by saying that he simply wants to make sure that the unqualified are not performing the procedure but that doesn’t make a lot of sense given the text of his bill. First, if that were the case then he really should better acquaint himself with the section of Illinois law that he is attempting to amend because it already contains provisions against practicing medicine and surgery without a license that more than adequately restrict tongue splitting to the realm of the medical professional. Second and more importantly, if he only wants to see people using qualified personnel then why include the latter portion of the bill which precludes even the qualified surgeon from performing the procedure without a “therapeutic or clinical basis”. This language is sure to be interpreted by doctors and their lawyers as effectively banning them from the procedure. Tongue splitting is a purely elective procedure. It falls in the same general arena as a rhinoplasty, breast augmentations, liposuction, and the like. It is here that Miller reveals his bias. He does not seek for any of these other, far riskier, elective operations to be justified on a clinical basis.

    So, just what is David Miller seeking to do? He is, I think quite plainly, attempting to make his opinions into law. And in doing so, he does not seem to care that he is infringing upon one the most basic and respected of our freedoms: Freedom of Expression. While the expression he opposes today is tongue splitting, it could just as easily be something else like breast implants, dancing, hair dye, or wearing a blue shirt — from a purely logical standpoint any one of these would be just as good as tongue splitting for the form of his argument. He has shown no basis whatsoever as to why tongue splitting should be singled out for restriction. What he has shown is that by exploiting visceral reactions and making unsubstantiated allegations that one can very nearly pass one’s prejudices into law (though I hardly think this qualifies as a major revelation in politics). But given that this law would be very hard to enforce since only the stupidest people would advertise their violation of it and that it would be easily circumvented by going outside Illinois, I have to wonder if there isn’t possibly something more to this…

    Miller and his bill have been receiving a great deal of press lately and this is the lifeblood of modern politics. While Miller has certainly not impressed me in my debates with him or his statements to the press, he is certainly no fool. He has to have realized that the defeat of a similar bill in another state would weigh against his chances for success. But I think he has also realized that body modification is currently very popular with the media — at least in terms of ‘eye candy’ and “heavy mods” like tongue splitting especially so. While the agencies behind them may not support or endorse body modifications the cameras will always gravitate to them. By putting out modification related legislation this otherwise unnoticeable politician has garnered himself national and even international press. As a community, if we are to be such, we can only hope and try our best so that he does not profit such exploitation by confronting his efforts and exposing his motives.





    Erik Sprague

    because the world NEEDS freaks…

    Former doctoral candidate and philosophy degree holder Erik Sprague, the Lizardman (iam), is known around the world for his amazing transformation from man to lizard as well as his modern sideshow performance art. Need I say more?

    Copyright © 2003 BMEZINE.COM. Requests to republish must be confirmed in writing. For bibliographical purposes this article was first published May 15th, 2003 by BMEZINE.COM in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.



  • Piercing guns are blasphemy! [The Publisher’s Ring]

    Piercing guns are blasphemy!

    “The reward of a thing well done, is to have done it.”

    – Ralph Waldo Emerson

    “One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man.”

    – Elbert Hubbard

    Those of you who have been reading BME for a long time probably remember our “No Piercing Guns” t-shirt published about five years ago, which we discontinued after lawsuits were threatened and launched against us and others with similar warnings. The gun manufacturers’ objection was with the list of reasons printed on the back, centered around the sterility issues as well as some of the design flaws that made the guns unsuitable for body piercing in general.


    This shirt addressed the core problems with classic-style piercing guns (essentially a spring-loaded device that propelled a piercing stud through flesh and was then reused on every client with minimal contamination control; rarely any more than an alcohol wipe), starting with the sterility issue. Because the guns were designed to be reused and their plastic bodies precluded the ability to autoclave them, bloodborne pathogens could easily be transmitted between clients — there are numerous known and well-documented cases of hepatitis being spread by these guns.

    The shirt also addressed the issue that the stud was relatively dull (far duller than a piercing needle) and was basically just rammed through the tissue with force. Now, on earlobes you can probably get away with this and not affect healing dramatically, but on other parts of the body significant damage could occur. Most notably in upper ear cartilage, these studs have been documented as being able to actually shatter the tissue, leading to collapse of the ear altogether and other serious problems. The “one-size-fits-all” nature of the studs (short; designed for a close fit around an earlobe) compounded this problem and by compressing the tissue could lead to increased swelling and irritation, which often would eventually lead to infection and/or rejection.


    Finally, the design of the guns in general was not really conducive to accurate placement. While they could “hit their marks” on lobes most of the time, their design made it difficult to accurately place the jewelry in any other part of the body — although I should point out that most reputable piercing gun manufacturers do emphasize that their guns are only to be used on earlobes and even go so far as to cancel the contracts of businesses that abuse their guns.

    While I’m mentioning “reputable” piercing gun manufacturers (it makes me sick to say that) I’ll also point out that a number have redesigned their guns to use disposable cartridges which go a long way to making them “single use”, thus dramatically reducing the chances of passing contamination from client to client. In a perfect world one might be able to make the argument that this design of gun is perfectly appropriate for use on earlobes.

    However…

    It’s not a perfect world.

    One has to take the human factor into account — this doesn’t solve the problem. It simply shifts the blame.

    A body piercer is expected to have at least a year of apprenticeship before they’re considered “trained”. Not because piercing — the act of piercing itself — is in and of itself difficult, but because there’s an enormous amount of peripheral knowledge that must be learned and practiced in order to keep the client safe. It’s not unusual for a piercing gun technician to receive just an hour’s training in the food court of some mall… Do you really think that’s enough time to adequately explain and train the finer points of universal precautions?

    You see, even if the disposable cartridge type of piercing gun goes a long way to addressing the obvious contamination issues, if the surrounding area (the gun body, the outside of the cases, the storage bins, the hands of the technician, whatever) becomes contaminated, it’s all for naught. The same of course goes for piercing studios, nail salons, barber shops, and any other business that comes in contact with blood; its safety really is judged by the lowest common denominator.

    In addition to poorly trained staff potentially negating any benefits to the redesigned guns, the issues that make the gun unsuitable for anything other than at best earlobes have not been addressed and likely can not be addressed. And that — the fact that the gun will never be anything other than a tool for punching holes in earlobes — is the main reason that BME doesn’t support the piercing gun and doesn’t publish stories built around it.

    But BME does publish things like self-piercing stories, often highly irresponsible and misguided. So why not publish stories using a gun? Doesn’t the end justify the means, at least a little? I don’t think so; in my opinion piercing guns are a dead end. Piercing guns have nothing to do with body modification. They’re a mistake.

    Look at it this way; if you wanted to become an astronaut, would you teach yourself to drive a motorboat, or would you teach yourself to fly an airplane? Both are methods of transportation, and really, it’s a lot cheaper and a lot more accessible to learn to be the skipper of a little fishing boat… But it’s not a path that leads you toward the heavens — just as piercing guns will not lead you to body modification.

    There is no direct bridge between the piercing gun industry and the body modification community. Sure, you can “move up” from the gun, but it represents not a step up from where you are, but instead a rejection of where you are and the embarkation on an entirely new path with sounder philosophies and methodologies. What that means is that by contributing financially and socially to the piercing gun industry, you are helping solidify a false path (and again, that ignores the fundamental health factors that on their own should be enough to convince any lucid individual to stay away from these devices).

    If BME were to pledge support to the piercing gun industry it would be spitting in the face of the piercing and body modification communities by propping up a business that in my opinion not only endangers its customers but misleads them about their potential future. After all, the easiest way to keep a person from achieving enlightenment is by sending them on a holy quest that is anything but holy — nearly every religion warns in its own way of the danger of false idols and dead end paths.

    I realize that I’m largely preaching to the choir here, but that doesn’t mean that you won’t have friends and relatives who end up in the sights of the well-funded and well-advertised piercing gun machine… Remember, “friends don’t let friends get gunned”. Unless you’re looking for a dead end path that’ll put your life in needless danger (and, if body modification is a spiritual act, perhaps even put your soul in peril), seek out a professional that can do a good job making all your dreams come true… not some hack that at best can do a shoddy job of making one dream come true, with no hope for the rest.

    Needles, dermal punches, and scalpels make my day.
    Use them well,


    Shannon Larratt

    BMEzine.com


  • Maybe we should judge books by their cover? [The Publisher’s Ring]

    Maybe we should judge books by their cover?


    "A popular admonition goes 'Don't judge a book by its cover.' Yet we do it all the time. We ascribe qualities of character to people based on their physical characteristics. And our language takes shape to reflect that attitude."

    – Anu Garg, founder of
    wordsmith.org

    One of body modification’s core purposes is communication. Humans are of course communicating animals — in some ways the complexity and depth of our methods is our most unique and defining characteristics. So when we permanently inscribe a public message using our bodies, it is the most core and true way in which we can communicate, as we say “I feel so strongly about this that I will become it”.

    I don’t think anyone would have any problem agreeing that the way you wear your hair and clothes and so on is a way of communicating who you are to the world. Even if a conscious effort is made “not to succumb to fashion”, that as well broadcasts a message. It’s inescapable. By looking a certain way we invite contact from some people, and also send a “stay away” message to others as we give them a brief but powerful visual introduction to who we are. Every culture in history has ascribed uniforms of style and appearance to themselves as a whole, to their subgroups and castes, and then of course to the individual.

    It is impossible to escape this conversation without withdrawing totally from in-person human interaction. Humans are designed for content-rich multi-media communication — to illustrate, think how different it is when you read a movie script versus actually seeing it, where you can watch the way a person presents themselves, how they move, their tone, and so on. Everything we can observe, we interpret.

    So when we modify our bodies in a way that’s visible to the public, we are communicating. Like it or not, we are sending a message. It is unavoidable.

    The interesting thing about transmitting a message with body modification is that it’s a message that will almost certainly be misinterpreted; how can an unmodified mainstream be expected to understand something that’s totally alien to them? But maybe it’s like abstract art: a subconscious way of communicating? Body modification is the most guttural and carnal way we can communicate, even more so than the primal cries of a fresh baby.

    Body modification doesn’t just seize control of the message; it changes the medium of transmission into the message. Marshall McLuhan of course wrote, “the medium is the message”, referring to the subliminal effects of the choice of medium both on the message and as the message. McLuhan believed that mass media would eventually bring us to a “global village” and the “spiritual form of information” would eventually transform all of “the human family [into] a single consciousness”. I have to wonder if the embracing of body modification — where humans transform themselves into the message itself — is a step toward that dream?

    If a person walks around in public yelling while holding a sign with a drawing on it, can we reasonably say, “oh, maybe they just liked the way the sign looked and didn’t think about what it meant”? Of course not — I think we all agree that if someone runs around carrying a sign that they don’t understand that the person is being a bit of an idiot… So why should it be any different with body modification, where you become the sign?

    There’s nothing wrong with judging a book by its cover when the author actually got to design it — a well designed cover should reflect the content of the book quite accurately. We, the modified, are in the privileged position of being willing to design our own covers, but we must take that privilege seriously. After all, what would you think of a book where the author had just done random scribbles that bore no relevance to the content, or did it poorly — or even worse, just copied the cover of someone else’s book?

    The other thing to remember is that we, as books, have only one cover, and we keep it for life. The message we inscribe on it is permanent, so we must be secure in saying what we say today tomorrow and the day after as well. The messages we choose to become must be eternal truths, or at least ones that can be eternally cherished and valued.

    Being aware of the above, how should we think about our body modification plans? How can we make our body modifications work for us, not against us?

    As I see it, we have five primary considerations that should be taken into account for any body modification decisions:

    1. Quality
    If you get a tattoo of something you care about, what does it say when you don’t bother going to a qualified artist? After all, you are becoming the tattoo. It’s not just a sticker that you can throw away — it is you. By stating something poorly, even if the message is true, the fact that it’s poorly stated may become the primary message. This world of ours has been populated by a multitude of amazing and beautiful people, but only those that put in effort to speak clearly and eloquently rise and succeed.

    2. Interpreted meaning
    How others interpret your mod is of course of primary importance since it’s what will open or close minds and doors. At present the modified represent between one and ten percent of the Western population, depending on what demographic you are looking at, so most people seeing your mods will be seeing them as alien to their own existence. The meaning they draw from them is with minimal common ground. If you want to reach the mainstream with your message (to say you don’t is to advocate isolationism and separatism), the interpreted meaning either has to be clear to them, or at least provide a bridge so you can open a productive dialogue and reveal to them the true meaning.

    3. True meaning
    The actual meaning will only be clear to you and to people who take the time to get to know you well. Depending on how abstract your message is, it may also only be apparent to those who are also modified since there are things one learns on this path that are very difficult to put to words. Either way, it’s important to concisely define your goal, and ensure that you’re working toward it with clarity, and that your mods are expressing that goal — even if you’re simply saying “this is making me happy”.

    4. Vibe
    While the specifics of a mod define its literal meaning, there is also a larger “vibe” that’s created by both the subtleties and the overall look you’re building. At its simplest, let’s take a classic rose tattoo. What vibe (if any) does it put off when it’s on an ankle? What about a forearm? A shoulder? A neck? In the pubic region, peeking out from just above the belt-line? When a person first comes into the range our senses, our mind automatically “classifies” them. That’s not a bad thing; it’s what allows us to structure ourselves socially. Body modification of course allows you to seize control of that process — use it to your advantage.

    5. Endurance
    It’s important to ask yourself exactly what message you’ll be sending not just today, but for all time. Will the mod become “dated”? There’s nothing wrong with something screaming “I got this in 1985″, but if a mod is permanent, you must consider both whether the message will continue to carry relevance (maybe you’d have been better off with a N’Sync t-shirt than a tattoo?), and more importantly, will it change in meaning in the future?

    Now don’t get me wrong — I believe that the primary consideration in any mod should be:


    “Does it make me happy?”

    …but as the metaphysical poet John Donne wrote, “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main…” Few of us can escape our role in the larger universe where we must productively communicate with the beings around us. So we must always remember that our body modifications, so long as they fall on public skin of course, are not just for us — they are also broadcasting a message to outsiders.

    And in return, we should feel free to judge others by the messages (or lack of messages) that they choose to transmit to us. We are the communicators. Complex communication is the tool we use to raise ourselves to being something other than animals. Remember that the next time you transform yourself into a message.

    That message can help you achieve your goals, or it can hinder you. While we are to some extent bound by the prejudice and ignorance of the lowest common denominator, ultimately the power rests in our hands.

    Good luck and keep on spreading your message,


    Shannon Larratt

    BMEzine.com


  • What the Modified can learn from Satan [The Publisher’s Ring]


    What the Modified can learn from Satan

    “I shall tell you a great secret, my friend. Do not wait for the last judgment, it takes place every day.”

    – Albert Camus

    Anton LaVey, the late founder of the Church of Satan, a modern spiritual movement that preached self-determination and self-empowerment as well as a rejection of societal norms (including mass religion) and embracing individually defined ritual for personal gain, defined the fifth of nine “Satanic sins” that all free individuals should avoid as “Herd Conformity”, writing,

    That’s obvious from a Satanic stance. It’s all right to conform to a person’s wishes, if it actually benefits you. But only fools follow along with the herd, letting an impersonal entity dictate to them.

    Clearly “the modified” have rejected the herd. Unless massive changes happen in mainstream society, body modification by definition forces the individual to stand outside the herd, whether in secret or in public. Simply by taking that little step of putting a small piece of metal through your navel, or permanently etching a design under your skin, you become something other than faceless.

    Not that stepping out of the herd guarantees success. While LaVey did call on his flock to practice discretion when it suited them — or, as my father once told me, “if you’re going to be a sociopath, you can be more effective if you don’t advertise the fact” — he also felt that there were times when it was important to be public about one’s allegiance. When asked how Satanists could achieve mainstream success and world domination, he replied,

    We need to do things, not just huddle together like pigs to keep warm. That’s what will destroy Christianity’s stranglehold on evolution and progress. When Satanists make pioneering discoveries and achievements, objective authorities can’t point to Satan as the Father of all that’s worthless and detrimental to society. They can’t say, ‘Gee, I wish we could use this vaccine — it’s too bad you’re a Satanist.’ On the contrary — they will be forced to see and acknowledge the quality, productivity and superiority of Satanic thought.

    Many famous people joined the Church of Satan at the time that LaVey wrote those words — Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, the Eagles, Tina Louise, Sammy Davis Jr, and a multitude of others who chose to remain anonymous — and similarly, many well known celebrities and other people of influence are members of BME and body modification enthusiasts. I wish I could list them here in a way that didn’t violate their right to privacy, but unfortunately body modification carries a higher stigma in the 2000′s than Satanism did in the 1970′s. As a result, the vast majority keep their interests a secret, even when they rise to positions of power that would be difficult to erode no matter what they pledged to publicly.

    In any case, the modified should learn from that statement and follow its advice. The easiest way to disprove the theory that the modified are degenerate losers that’ll never amount to anything is by not only succeeding in life, but by being better than them at everything. Not only does the modern Western world test truth by measuring success, but more importantly, whoever wins gets to set the rules for the next round of the game… Right now there are many rules in place designed to keep us down; only by asserting ourselves and succeeding can we change those rules — whining isn’t going to change anything.

    Satanists are superior people. To gain immortal perspective and power, you must actively practice isolation from the herd. Turn off the television set. It’s meant to program you to think like everyone else. Use it as a device for your own pleasure, but as with fire or electricity, be aware of the danger. Use your difference, your alienation, rather than be used by it. Know that it’s your differences that makes you powerful — you don’t want to lose them, or you lose your power.

    Our biggest advantage may be that we, at least for a moment, were able to reject the shackles that enslave and imprison the herd — and if we could do it once, we can do it again. In order to exercise control over the herd and solidify their position the powerful (wealthy families, corporations, banks, governments, and so on) impose a way of living that is detrimental to achieving success and rising through the ranks. So what do we need to do?

    1. Reject all things that enslave us. We know we don’t have to look like them… so why do we have to accept the rest of the self-imposed slavery?
    2. Once you’ve chosen your path, do it well. Work hard. Do it as well as you can, and win, using those victories as the foundation for more.

    But once you’ve achieved some modicum of success, how do you spread that influence universally? LaVey’s Satanism sought not only to liberate its members, but to liberate humanity, and it recognized that to do that it ultimately would be faced with destroying its philosophical nemesis, Christianity.

    Choosing not to go to church isn’t enough. It’s not going to stop the brainwashing of millions of other people. There can be no room for this ecumenical attitude of, ‘Well, if God works for them and makes them happy, it won’t hurt me to let them go on believing it.’ But it does hurt you. When there are that many people in positions of authority thinking muddled, incoherent thoughts, it’s going to affect you. To completely overthrow mystically-oriented religions, Satanists choose active opposition. We don’t need to show any tolerance or good fellowship to these sheep now that we’re calling the shots. Have Christians ever shown Satanists any mercy?

    In our case, we need to ensure that we do a few important things to get started:

    1. If a job rejects us because of mods, or a business treats us badly, we need to stop giving them money, and we need to make sure that everyone we know does the same, and we need to make sure the business knows it. We need to ensure that we aren’t paying to be oppressed, and we need to ensure that our money feeds only those who value us and the freedoms we stand for. Put simply, don’t support those who would destroy you!
    2. If someone, be it a parent, a friend, or a stranger reacts negatively to the modified, we should first try and correct their ignorance, but if they choose to embrace their stupidity, blacklist them. Cut them out of your life. Do them no favors, and accept none in return. If they are not willing to accept who you are as a free person, you should not accept them as your passive jailor. Even if they don’t discriminate against you per se (ie. the double standard of telling someone you love them while saying you hate who they are), as long as they support a system that does they are declaring themselves your enemy.
    3. If we find ourselves in a position of hiring employees, we should do our best to hire qualified and modified people and ensure they do the job we give them well. Doing so will have a snowball effect; the more modified people the public sees, the more willing they are both to take that step themselves, the more comfortable they are around modified people, and the more likely they will be to hire modified people themselves. We need to make being a free individual “normal” and desirable.
    4. The more success we reach personally, the more we should use that success to show the world not just that “Joe is a success”, but that “Joe the modified man is a success”. This is extremely important. We need modified doctors, lawyers, bankers, police, athletes, and more. If you’re modified, and people look up to you, use that to our advantage. When people imagine a stereotype of success, it should include individualistic (rather than conformist) behavior, including body modification.

    Because I am a proponent of “friendly isolationism”, people often write me and say, “Shannon, why do you always have to be so ‘us-and-them’… wouldn’t it be better to build bridges instead?”

    To me the idea of building a bridge is ludicrous. Why would a free person want to build a bridge to a slave colony? If anyone should be building bridges it’s them — to escape their boring prisons! The only reason to open a dialogue with the unmodified is to allow them the opportunity to take a step in the right direction — toward our way of life, a way of being that doesn’t place fearful boundaries on our bodies as defined by skin… a way of life that provides powerful tools that can guide a person to enlightenment.

    Now, don’t get me wrong — I’m very aware that there are many paths up the mountain and that the view from the top is probably the same — certainly there are free and enlightened individuals that choose not to undertake body modification personally. I’m reminded of the scene in Once Were Warriors (a highly recommended movie that addresses the need to bring the values that allowed people to survive oppression and slavery into modern lives) when a facially tattooed Maori asks his younger brother why he doesn’t wear the traditional moko. “I wear mine on the inside”, he replies, and there’s certainly truth to that statement.

    But it’s not that easy. Just because a person says “I choose not to be modified” does not mean that they actually made a choice. Hiding under your blankets at night because you are afraid of the dark is very different than loving the light. Their “choice” may well simply mean that they are afraid to step into a self-determined and self-responsible way of living.

    Assertion: Body modification is the most accessible and safest “key” to unlocking the doors to personal freedom, individual affirmation, and spiritual enlightenment that I’ve ever seen. We, the modified, need to work hard to succeed in life, and through our actions ensure that this key is protected and can reach as many people as desire it.

    Keep fighting,

    Shannon Larratt

    BMEzine.com


  • Latest Tattoo, Piercing, and Body Modification News