tattoo or not tattoo

Darth Bagel said:

Just for the record I a 3/4 or 2/3 sleeve generally only goes to the elbow or slightly past it. So the common IV locations are still open.

Click to expand...

The elbow (antecubical) is the number one place to put in an emergency IV. My favorite place is on the forearm usually very close to the elbow where the veins are larger.

I think you are also assuming that you will always have "healthy" veins that are easy to access. I am starting to see people that easily require 6 or so attempts before we can actually get an IV that works...and on a longer stay, we have to change the IVs on a regular basis to minimize the risk for infection. Long sleeves tend to reduce patients to getting IVs in the hands or wrists ...both inconvenient (think about trying to wash your hands) and more painful. For a PICC line, which is a long term form of IV, this is placed in the upper arm. People aren't young forever and the tattoos don't go away because your body gets old and sick.

ck_psy said:

It's not a sweeping generalization, it's backed up by empirical evidence.

Click to expand...

You stated, point blank: "in my sphere of influence (of that being a western society) tattoos do represent a statistically significant risk taking and promiscuous personality." Not some tattoos, not most, but tattoos in general, meaning that within the "sphere" of western influence, whether they be found on soldiers who risked their lives, foreigners, natives who wear tattoos as a matter of tradition, holocaust survivors who were tattooed involuntarily, or the Christians here who do have tattoos, all are carelessly lumped into that group, because tattoos represent a promiscuous personality, as though that had been established as fact.

Empirical evidence does not give you the right to make sweeping generalizations like that, and an accusation is false in the case that one person is falsely judged, rendering the entire statement to be false, no matter how sophisticated your source or methodology may seem to be.

redblue22 said:

how would you feel if your SO wanted to get a tattoo?

.

Click to expand...

Not a big deal, depending on what it is and where. Oh, and how much. Volume of ink to skin ratio comes into play here.

Nanopants said:

You stated, point blank: "in my sphere of influence (of that being a western society) tattoos do represent a statistically significant risk taking and promiscuous personality."

Click to expand...

You're reading too much into it.
The key word I used was statistically significant.
What that means is that it gives cause to reject the null hypothesis.

Originally Posted by ck_psy Do you think that's possible because you generalized when referring to tattoos in general? Here's some definitions you may find helpful:

gen·er·al·ize

verb \ˈjen-rə-ˌlīz, ˈje-nə-\ : to make a general statement or form a general opinion; especially : to state an opinion about a larger group that is based on a smaller number of people or things within that group
: to apply (something specific, such as a theory or rule) to larger group


Accident (fallacy)

The informal fallacy of accident (also called destroying the exception or a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid) is a deductively valid but unsound argument occurring in statistical syllogisms (an argument based on a generalization) when an exception to a rule of thumb[1] is ignored. It is one of the thirteen fallacies originally identified by Aristotle. The fallacy occurs when one attempts to apply a general rule to an irrelevant situation.
For example:

Cutting people with knives is a crime. →
Surgeons cut people with knives. →
Surgeons are criminals.

Tattoos do not always represent a promiscuous personality, even in the context of western society. What I'm saying is really simple. Maybe some do, and possibly most, although I'm inclined to doubt the interpretation of the empirical evidence on that one because of varying definitions of "promiscuity." I think people who have an inclination to deviate from western norms in their use of tattoos may also have a higher inclination to reject the west's "normal" definitions of promiscuity (such as ones based on civil law). It's possible to be very loyal, and monogamous, and still be described as "promiscuous" based on such definitions.

I don't get tattoos or why people have them. I however would not object if she loved them and wanted to have them, it's her choice.

Refer back to my earlier post (of which you quoted and emphasized).

"in my sphere of influence (of that being a western society) tattoos do represent a statistically significant risk taking and promiscuous personality."

I referred to my specific 'sphere of influence', and not generally.

I am not generalizing because the studies had a valid confidence level.
And yes of course the participants in the society were from a western culture, and did not take into account native americans/maoris/pacific islanders.

But I still stand on the findings of the study.

SWAMI, V. (2012), Written on the body? Individual differences between British adults who do and do not obtain a first tattoo. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53: 407–412.

Wohlrab, S., Stahl, J., Rammsayer, T. and Kappeler, P. M. (2007), Differences in personality characteristics between body-modified and non-modified individuals: associations with individual personality traits and their possible evolutionary implications. Eur. J. Pers., 21: 931–951.

Are there exceptions to the rule?

Yes - as you've pointed out, certain cultures like Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, Maoris, etc have tattoos for different reasons and they wouldn't necessarily fall into the same observations as the ones in the study.

Look I can understand your point, - that there are exceptions. But that is exactly what they are - exceptions.

In my view the study and the findings still stand.

Fair enough, and the data may be accurate, but concerning the statements based on an interpretation of the data including the conclusions of the study, in as much as they are intended to be descriptive of all tattoos in the sphere of western influence, they are rife with the same high-minded, ethnocentric, and domineering attitudes that are so characteristic of the West, and can be considered false and slanderous accusations by many groups of people.

got to be a cool tattoo, and not a lame one.

It depends...

redblue22 said:

how would you feel if your SO wanted to get a tattoo?

.

Click to expand...

I'd be down.

I wouldn't mind. I find them kind of hot now..

MehGuy said:

I wouldn't mind. I find them kind of hot now..

Click to expand...

I know right?!

Yeah, I don't know why it took me so long..

I used to think tattoos were hideous, lol.

I'm telling you man, a cute chick with a half sleeve... I'm done.

Darth Bagel said:

I'm telling you man, a cute chick with a half sleeve... I'm done.

Click to expand...

You like the Suicide girls huh?

Miss Spaulding said:

I wouldn't be too happy about it. I really dislike tattoos, for myself and on other people.

Click to expand...

This, exactly.

Not to say I wouldn't date a guy with a tattoo, because I actually have. But they don't appeal to me at all.

GQ Chris said:

You like the Suicide girls huh?

Click to expand...

Lil bit.