Goomba38 wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
> I saw this child who was maybe 3 years old and the
>> first words out of my mouth to John after they'd gone by were, "Oh
>> tell me those weren't real tattoos." We saw the same family a while
>> later and sure enough, this *toddler* has honest to god tattoos of
>> dragons on his forearms. Okay, a three year old might be capable of
>> expressing an extreme dislike for broccoli. But somehow I don't
>> think this same child has the ability to decide oh yeah, I want
>> dragons tattooed on my arms because I get to keep them for the rest
>> of my life, unless I just want some really bad tattoo removal scars
>> later. Yes, bring on the needles!
>
> Those are just rub-on temporary ones that kids use.

I've seen the temp tattoos; these looked like the bonified real deal to us.
And if so, shame on those parents.

> It seems to be that tattoos on women immediately brings to my mind
> "Lower socioeconomic class".. they do tend to have fewer teeth, more
> bleached hair, dunlap fat hanging over their too low and too tight
> jeans....all those "butterflies" and "roses" and other trite
> "feminine" symbols just look sad. I can only hope some of those are
> temporary too
> and these women won't have to regret them in years to come?
> Goomba (offensively opinionated, for sure!)