Y’all, Dumbness, And Pointless Studies
I recently learned that shipping cigarette tobacco has been made illegal. This vexes me terribly because I enjoy rolling my own cigarettes. It used to be much more cost effective at the quantity that I smoke than buying packs. I don’t smoke that much, mom. I love you, mom. But our president, a smoker, has prevented me from getting tobacco for cigarettes through the mail. I could head down to the CVS and grab a can, but with all of the tax that has been recently applied to cigarettes, that’s not cost effective either. Before you nonsmokers get up my ass, I know smoking is bad for me. Most smokers do; we’re not stupid. We just enjoy smoking, and I think it’s bullshit that my freedoms are being pinched like a Peter North pop shot. (If you got that, you’re a sick child.) My dad, a non smoker, summed it up best when he said to my mother, also a nonsmoker, “Just wait until it’s one of your freedoms they take away.”
The eye I behold I believe is a skewed one. It’s also one that needs corrective lenses. Literally and figuratively. I do see beauty in all people, and most things. You kids know this because I write about it constantly. With that said, and within that context, I do find things attractive or unattractive. Beauty and attractiveness are two very different things. A woman can, to me, be beautiful but unattractive. It’s a measure of taste, and that’s what makes the human eye an interesting little ball of wet wonder. Into each one of our tiny irises travel the things that make us interested in knowing more. Lines and colors and shapes of face and body. It’s an interesting little preference. Even then, if the eye gathers the data which passes our firewall, other elements can then flag what we see. I don’t care how hot a dame is, if she drags her feet when she walks, she can drag her feet right on passed me. If she uses the word ‘yous’ in conversation, she can talk to someone else. If she claims to be good at something, like art or music, and she sucks at it, she can sing out of key to someone else. Modification, however, can supersede a lot of shortcomings to me. A girl with most excellent modifications can keep me listening for a little longer even if she says ‘yous’ and ‘like’ and ‘y’all’ before every sentence.
Erin Donnelly, who writes for stylelist.com, has reported otherwise. Why am I reading stylelist.com you ask? Yeah, I don’t know either. I guess I’m a glutton for mindless dribble. Stephanie Meyer anyone? In Erin’s little story, she regales the results of a British survey that says forty-seven percent of men find tattoo modification on women to be a turnoff. Also in the study, thirty-eight percent of limey women find tattoos on men to be a turn off, and twenty-three percent of those surveyed with tattoos regret their modifications. Erin cleverly injects celebrity tattoo connections, such as Angelina Jolie and David Beckham, into the blurb. Revealed in the actual survey was the interesting nugget that said fifty-five percent of adults surveyed think Amy Winehouse looks worse with her mods than Megan Fox does with hers.
What does this data mean? Well, one thing should be clear. Someone is wasting someone else’s money asking people if they find celebrities with tattoos sexy or not. How do I get in on that? Can I just start a nonsense study and get people to give me money to research it? It’s like that UCLA study a while ago about how fair a coin flip really is. Dumbness. Let’s think about the location of the study. I’ve never been to England. It’s not because I don’t want to go; it’s because the TSA has me on a no fly list for trying to smuggle twenty-two tubes of Crest onto a plane. I made that part up. I don’t have a passport nor do I have any money. I can’t speak to the day to day climate of the culture of the British. I think, as an American, I have this fed perception of a more culturally conservative society. A starched shirt, polite, and correct English language society. I’m not entirely sure where this perception comes from, but I’m sure it’s not entirely accurate. Like the idea of the French being carefree and running around naked all the time. (“Never try to get your peter sucked in France!” Name that song.) Across the pond, we have these ideas of what the countries in Europe are like, and I would assume that they aren’t terribly accurate. But if the idea of what the British are like is accurate, then the results of this study make a bit of sense. A much more socially conservative culture is going to likely find modifications on women to be a turn off. I don’t think you need a guy with a clipboard at a mall to arrive at that conclusion.
The inclusion of the Angelina Jolie and David Beckham celebrities is an easy tool to fill out the article. Becks is covered in modifications, and Jolie is a terrible actress. I don’t find Jolie attractive, mostly because she makes awful movies, but I don’t think it is her modifications that sully her to me. I think her mods are whatever. She seems to have a lot of words and symbols and things and that’s just great. Beckham is an athlete, and I think athletes get a pass on modifications because we just assume that athletes are insane. So when an athlete rolls up with dumb tattoos, we don’t care so long as he puts the ball in the net for your team. Dennis Rodman anyone? But the interesting celebrity connection is what’s included in the study itself. Fifty-five percent of those surveyed said Amy Winehouse looks worse with her mods than Megan Fox. I wonder what precipitates that statistic. Is it the attractiveness of the blank canvass before considering the mods? Perhaps Winehouse isn’t attractive to most regardless of her mods. Or is it in actuality that her mods make her less attractive. It can’t be talent over aesthetic; Megan Fox is a horrible actress, but she’s fun to look at. Maybe it is because of the mods themselves. Maybe those surveyed don’t dig the specific tattoos that Winehouse has, and favors Fox’s mods instead. Perhaps it is location or how they are pasted into her skin.
Outside of celebrities, I have to question the forty-seven percent of men who find tattoo modification on women unattractive. I’d ask them, “Forty-seven percent, what is it like to be just shy of half? Is it like Mickey Mantle having a career batting average of .298?” And then I’d ask, “Forty-seven percent, are tattoos really a deal breaker?” If one of the folks in this percentage started a relationship with a dame that escalated to making whoopie (that’s for you Newlywed Game fans), and he found a tattoo in an intimate spot (that’s for you vagina fans), would he immediately lose his Big Ben (that’s for you penis fans)? I doubt it. I don’t think most guys would kick a broad out of bed for something as simple as a shitty tattoo. We’re talking about men, here.
Women are a different beast, however. If a dame has decided that mods are not in the formula for her to open her barn doors, then her barn doors will remain closed. Broads are nuts, and that’s science talking, not me. If the tide isn’t right and the wind isn’t blowing in the right direction and dinner was a degree off of the temperature that she likes and she didn’t get the right parking spot at work earlier that day, then dude ain’t getting any. The statistic about women doesn’t startle me.
What does startle me slightly (not much, really) is that the clean canvass is still a standard that those looking to date or mate or whatever still look for. Aesthetic standards are always a something that is difficult for me to understand. We all have them, but it seems as if we are often ashamed to admit them. I suppose there’s nothing wrong with them. If you want a white dude or a black dude or a dude with hair or a tall dude or whatever your aesthetic standards are, you should own that I suppose. That includes people with or without modifications, I suppose. I also suppose that this conclusion contradicts the first sentence of this paragraph, and it also includes way too many uses of ‘I suppose.’ I suppose that whatever gets your weenis ready to work or your chooch good to go is what you find attractive, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Aesthetic is a wonderful chameleon. As unique to each of us as a fingerprint. Or a tongue print. Isn’t the pattern on your tongue different for everyone? I think I read that somewhere. Stay beautiful, kids.
Talk to A. Robert Basile on AIM at Basilephone
Yahoo Messenger at firstname.lastname@example.org