| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
atrapat (0)
|
That's a nice 2 in 1 poll.
|
07-25-09 02:14am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
Jay G (Disabled)
|
Where's the "Old enough to Know Better....I don't care....it's how hot the girl is that counts" category?
|
07-25-09 02:31am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Lionheart (0)
|
I am not a fan on any tattos on the girl
|
07-25-09 02:55am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
TalonIcefire (0)
|
Not into the full body tattoos. However, not opposed to occasional tats so long as they do not detract from the lady.
|
07-25-09 03:19am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
RagingBuddhist (Disabled)
|
Hmm.... that was a pretty quick cutoff in the age categories. Like 36 or thereabouts is the beginning of the end or something?
My profile will show that I'm nearing five zero and I'm dead set against tattoo murals, even avoiding downloading some scenes because of 'em. I've gotten somewhat used to tramp stamps in video, although I think it'd be a big issue if I found out I was dating someone with one. But I think a small tattoo, maybe two, as long as they aren't crude, can be attractive.
|
07-25-09 03:40am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
I chose absolutely none. Playin' in safe. I mean, say "1" and the ink might never stop flowing!
Little "accent" tatoos on the ankles are OK. That's what Lucy Stratilova has, for example. (She was recently an avatar of mine.)
Anywhere else and I say, "Girl, you ain't got the sense you was born with."
|
07-25-09 05:57am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
pat362 (0)
|
In a perfect world I would have chosen none but since I live in this one and tattoos seem to be very popular with theyoung then as long as it's 1 or 2 very discreet ones then that's fine.
|
07-25-09 06:18am
Reply To Message
|
8
|
Denner (0)
|
1: I dislike tattoos in general - and on girls/women in every way.
2: And Yes, I'm way over 36 - so maybe that's has a lot to do with my dislike.
But ok - if it's small and only one or two - my first wife had a little butterfly next to the pussy - sweet - another girlfriend had a couple - bigger ones on the thighs - and that turned me off in the long run.
Met a girl later on with a couple of tattooos on the arm and the breasts - nada - could not handle that.
Guess this is foremost a matter of age - younger people are getting used to it - and probably liking it - I never will.
|
07-25-09 07:05am
Reply To Message
|
9
|
elephant (0)
|
tattoos look horrible in my opinion and I forgive really hot girls for having them but really wish they never had them in the first place, just look horrid. Peaches Geldoff, not the most attractive girl by a long shot has had this daisey chain tattoo from her feet to her boobs and ogh my god I nearly threw up when I clocked eyes on it. repulsive now she is and when she looks in a mirror in her 60s she'll think "oh hell bells"
|
07-25-09 07:06am
Reply To Message
|
10
|
james4096 (Suspended)
|
If a girl is a punk chick or something, then it's okay for her to have almost as many tats as she wants. It's part of her whole personality and look.
But I hate seeing tattoos, especially tramp stamps, on normal girls. There are so stupid, ugly and played out. Not sexy at all. Though there are exceptions.
And um, 36+. But luckily we don't only have to stick to one age range outside of the poll.
|
07-25-09 09:11am
Reply To Message
|
11
|
PinkPanther (0)
|
I'm fine with tattoos, if they're sexy and artistic - if some girl gets some skanky jailhouse tat, that's a turn-off, but artistic tats can cover large areas of a girl's bod and I'll be happy. I know a lot of guys really didn't like when Janine got large-area tattoos, but I thought they made her hotter.
|
07-25-09 11:24am
Reply To Message
|
12
|
exotics4me (0)
|
I'm under 36, barely, and picked as many as possible. Not that I prefer tattoos, but having grown up in Southern California, Pico Union, lots of Hispanic girls and some do have tattoos to promote the heritage. I love the Aztecan tattoos, usually a small bird with a traditional Aztecan headdress on the bird. I don't care for seeing the little beach girls in Santa Monica with their "tribal" suns around their bellybuttons. To me, it is more about heritage and understanding the meaning. My late grandfather had tattoos from his thighs to ankles on both legs as a tribute to his Samoan heritage. So, I guess you could say I'm used to them, but will continue to say no to the ones that are just there for a fad.
|
07-25-09 05:23pm
Reply To Message
|
13
|
GCode (0)
|
REPLY TO #5 - RagingBuddhist :
I used these age ranges because there was a huge forum post (I think it was about fake boobs) and the tattoos thing got brought up with a few arguments that maybe younger people would be more tolerant of tattoos than older folk, just do do the normalcy of tattoos these days. So, I was interested in what the difference in opinions would be in the different age ranges. You only get 6 options in these polls to write in responses so it was limited, if I had a choice and with more options I would probably do an 18 - 25 range, 26-35 range, 36-50 range, then 50+ but obviously that would be redundant and it's not like were doing scientific research here :) I just thought maybe 18-35 would be more of the 'younger generation' and maybe over 36 would be a bit in the 'older generation'. I know you were probably just being sarcastic but I thought this did owe a bit of an explanation.
|
07-25-09 08:56pm
Reply To Message
|
14
|
GCode (0)
|
Honestly, when I made this I really thought that it would be a land slide in the 18-35 range being in the 1 or 2 or the more, the better niche but am a bit suprised that the majority are saying no tattoos is better. However, the fact that the 36+ range have none so far in the more, the better niche was what I thought was going to happen. It's always fun to see in polls what people really think. This is why I love doing research when I was in college and can hopefully do more if I ever go on for my masters.
I am in the 18-35 range I put 1 or 2. I am so used to seeing tattoos in not only porn but real life that a casual tattoo here and there is so normal to me, I don't even notice really. Of course, the bigger the more anyone would notice, so yeah if it's considered one 'sleeve' (whole arm tattoo) that's a little different. But one or two on anywhere is quite normal to me so I don't mind. It's not that I prefer none to a lot, I just don't mind 1 or 2. If they have none, that's cool, if they have a lot, I can like that too. But, if I had to choose I'd honestly say I prefer none to a little than a lot.
|
07-25-09 09:02pm
Reply To Message
|
15
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
Yes, the results in generational terms are not clear cut at all. I was also surprised that more in the 18-35 crowd objected completely to tats than did the older folks, 41% vs. 18% as of this moment.
But the tatoo has a long history and I remember seeing people who came a generation before me who had them, more men than women but some women as well. The difference is that tats have become more popularized through the media, and they're less purely "blue collar" than they used to be, though perhaps it's another fad that's on the wane now.
|
07-26-09 02:29am
Reply To Message
|
16
|
HeyManNiceShot (0)
|
Really interesting results- not what I expected! I would have expected the older age group to be less accepting of tats.
|
07-26-09 03:29pm
Reply To Message
|
17
|
alexmedia (0)
|
I am 26 and I don't care about tattoos, but I definitely don't like too many tattoos.
|
09-18-09 07:27am
Reply To Message
|
