I see. In that case we'll chalk it up to his "self-expression." Maybe the only difference between him and his subject matter is the medium on which the ink is laid! Lol.
"Before long, the banknotes were trading at more than their value in silver, and Law was made Controller General of Finances, in charge of the entire French economy."
This is super interesting. Does anyone familiar with the subject matter have an idea why?
>> So the author doesn't like tattoos but decided to write an article anyway? Why?
>> Wait. Please rein in your presumptions. I asked why and nothing more.
Unless your writing tends to be very tangential, or you are only using conjunctions for stylistic purposes, it's hard for me to read this and not take the position that you are asking for some kind of justification.
Specifically: "You do Z, but you do X, why?" In my very limited world, this construct implies there is a disconnect (or more rather, some connection that needs clarification) between the two. The implication is that Z and X held together create a tension in your world that needs resolution.
Perhaps that can be considered presumptuous, but if that is considered presumption then I don't think I'll be able to correctly interpret your position without a lot more syntactic clarification.
No harm done, and I'm sure we find much more agreement elsewhere. Besides, this is hardly the best thing I've read all year; I just found it funny and somewhat interesting, and I thought I found some negative pattern in the comments that would stifle otherwise interesting conversation. But perhaps the poster and I just have poor taste of cheeky humor and this doesn't belong here! That's possible too. Cheers.
Okay, before I continue this conversation further I just want to note that I understand your concern for the optics of an educated doctor appearing to condescend to a large group of young people, but I think yes, he does have much more insight than the average person on tattoos, and I think it's made in jest with a little cultural misunderstanding on humor.
I have a tattoo but I acknowledge I'm not an expert. I did take a class on the psychological and social constructs behind body modifications and clothing, but most people with strong opinions on a subject believe their factual knowledge is "above average," including myself. In return, I'd like you to consider the limits of your knowledge on the topic as well.
Okay, so continuing...
>> Neither. I'm just not interested in unsubstantiated personal opinions. So the author doesn't like tattoos but decided to write an article anyway?
I'm just going to restate the first sentence of the essay here: "When I started as a prison doctor in 1990, I was both fascinated and horrified by the tattoos inscribed on the skins of the prisoners." I'd say he's more than qualified to write an op-ed on this topic. This is also not a scientific topic, so if you're looking for facts, then yes it's not the right article.
On the other hand, I think you've pointed out your chief objection clearly: People should not write about topics they don't have nice things to say about. I think this is the implicit position people take, and I appreciate you being explicit about it. As a matter of principle, I don't just disagree, but disagree very strongly with this statement.
>> That's not a novel observation for me. What's subtle or funny about it?
Ask anyone with tattoos, and while everyone "knows" that tattoos fade, it's much different when it's your tattoo. Tattoos are consistently listed at the top of the list of regrets young people make, that's a fact. I don't think it's obvious to a lot of them how it's going to look later, even really nice, expensive pieces. And that's what he's noting there. It's not just aging, it's fading and bleeding of colors. Ink on skin does not age the same way as on other media, and I seriously doubt anyone without a piece or working with clients can actually can predict what the tattoo will look like ten to twenty years later.
>> "These are not points that needed making with me."
I'm genuinely interested in what you mean by this. Like, you think that it's false, or you take umbrage to it being brought up?
>> "There was just nothing in there for me"
I'm guessing this is emphasis on the above point.
>> "should I chuckle at the commonplace that people look worse with age?"
No, and if you think he's making a trivially true comment then you're missing a subtler point. Anyone with a nice tattoo will lament the fact that it will fade, it will lose crisp lines, and it will look bad over time.
That's why for nice pieces touchups are necessary, but you have a limited number of those.
Hey fellow hackers, I think you need to work on your sense of humor.
As someone who is inked, I not only found this hilarious, but interesting and well-written, and the author actually has experience with prison tattoos, which makes him more expert than 99% of us, easily.
Also, this may shock you, but I'm going to go out on a limb and agree with the author that your tattoo is neither original nor cool, so if that's what you find offensive then you've totally missed the point!