15 February, 2012

The Women In Mod Article Has No Luster


The views and opinions expressed in this article are those only of the author and may only coincidentally reflect those of Mystic Metals, its employees, or associates. All responses should be posted as comments here, or mailed directly to the author, A. Robert Basile, at ihatebasile@gmail.com.
Mail sent directly to Mystic Metals will not be read.


The Women In Mod Article Has No Luster

2.15.12
Looking for something to write about today, I came across some responses to that Lisa Khoury article that we addressed a couple of weeks ago. I’m not going to address it any much more, but I have to say; you guys made mine the best article out there. Thanks, kids. It means a lot to me. Also, yesterday my beautiful lover Nanci and I went to the zoo, and I saw gorillas and it was awesome. Also, a baby orangutan tried to hug my girlfriend. If you’ve never seen a baby orangutan, image search it. Smile guaranteed.
So in searching for something to write about today, I came across yet another article about women and tattoos. I love women, I love tattoos; but I’m getting kind of irritated writing about this so much. What is going on with people just realizing that women are modified? Or does it just seem that way? Probably the latter. Let’s talk about it a little bit.
The article I read today was not really a commentary. It was more of a local news fluff thing about ‘hey, have you heard that women are getting tattooed? Really! Women!’ Which is what you ought to expect from local news, I suppose. Cat in a tree, top story at eleven kind of bullshit. But the tones of articles like this present a certain attitude that seems a little absurd to me. Most of these women in mod articles (most, not all; right Lisa Khoury?) have this ‘this is just great that these women people have decided to participate in this activity and we should all clap vigorously as if it were a kindergarden Sunday school passion play performance.’ Isn’t this a little insulting to women who modify?
Historically, yes; women have not been the ones who have partaken in the culture. Save, of course, the carnie attraction tattooed and bearded lady. Now, ladies growing beards as an increasing trend is news, but this isn’t about beards (though beards are awesome. See also; me). But if the awe and wonder of women modifying is leaning on history and the past for its credibility, then ought we also write these types of articles about women playing sports and getting CEO jobs and being lesbian and choosing not to marry and have kids? These activities (and being lesbian isn’t an activity, I know; save the hate mail) were just as unlikely in the era that women with modifications was unlikely. The past, and it is a growingly distant past, dictated that tattoo modification was reserved for sailors and bikers and carnies and the aboriginal tribes of wherever. If that is the same past we are going to reference for our outrageous attraction to the modern woman modifying, then I oughtn’t be modified. You probably oughtn’t be modified either. Those mod butchers with tattoo reality shows don’t fall into that category either. Not actors nor musicians nor business owners nor warriors nor athletes. So shouldn’t we be reading articles about all these types indulging in modification as well? Breaking news: Writer and bass player from New Jersey stretches lobes and tattoos arms. Story at 10:30. But that’s not news, is it. And that’s because men have embraced the art on a steeper rate than women have. And I get that, but shouldn’t we be in a mental position of ‘who gives a shit?’
Women in the man’s world. Blah, blah, fleergle, flingle. I’m not in that boat, don’t get me wrong. And yes, I’m not a women so I don’t know how it is and all of that happy horseshit. I know what I see, however. And I see women’s roles in society changing. It’s a fine thing. Women can do anything a man can; isn’t that the message? I believe that for the most part. I mean, I don’t think a woman can beat Lou Ferigno in a fist fight, but who can? I’m looking at you, Chuck Norris. And they do. I mean women do man things, not beat up Lou. And yes, I understand that the struggle of women in society has been a long and hard fought battle. I’d never discredit that. Trust me. Or else I’ll have to hear my hippie mother go on about marches and signs and ‘bringing the boys home’ with sit-ins and other crap that I in no way support as policy changing behavior. (I love you, mom.) But women breaching the tattoo barrier isn’t news to me. Women fighting closer to the front lines at war is news to me. (And that’s happening now; look it up, look it uppers.) That’s a much more social timber changing event than ‘women mod more.’ A woman president, news. A women with a chest piece, not news. A woman pro baseball player, news. A woman with a six gauge septum, not news.
We have an interesting protective attitude toward our women in this culture. And we probably ought. We should always be a little more protective of the women. They make the people, after all. Genocide lesson number 72: You want to destroy a society, kill the women so they can’t make more people. But we also protect them from things from which they need no protection. Like modification. After all, aren’t women the ones who paint their faces and wear the fancy clothes and paint the fingernails and pay much more attention to their aesthetic comfort than men? I’ve seen very few cats with foundation on their faces and fingernail paint. So wouldn’t it serve logic to say that women participating in the aesthetic beauty and comfort that modification brings should be more logical than a man getting modded?
I’m a pretty even guy. Black and white thinker, right and wrong, crime and punishment. I am a fan of allowing a someone to do a something without criticism. Then, if he fails, criticize. If he succeeds, praise. This goes for any person type. White, black; man, women; gay, straight. Let him do what he wants and screw the sociological backlash. That backlash will inevitably become frontlash (what?) over time. That’s how things change. Take a modified woman and send her back to 1954 and see the reaction. Take the same woman and send her to 2537 and see the reaction. Let people of different flavors do what they want to do and let them deal with the assholes of society who are tethered to rules that only still apply in the minds of people and not actually in the timber of the culture and society.
Should we be excited that women are more participatory in the culture of modification? Absolutely. But c’mon; let’s stop treating it as if it’s a ‘yay, you did it! Good for you! Yay!’ kind of thing. That’s how a lot of these articles read, and that’s what chafes my ass more than anything. I’m not a trophy for everyone kind of guy. I’m the kind of cat that says praise for success, tutor for failure, normalize for comfort. I don’t care much what shape or flavor you are, what your crotch looks like or what gets your sex juices flowing. You want to do something? You want to try something? Do it. Try it. I’m just not sure that the Icee-Pop after the Little League game win or lose response is all that appropriate. You’re a broad with three hundred hours of work? Awesome. I’d like to meet you and hang out with you. But let’s keep the ‘isn’t that strange and awkwardly wonderful’ golf clap for the two year old who took his first step. Is that when they start to walk? Two? I have no idea. Let’s keep the legitimate pride in our culture for the adults. I love modified women. I love unmodified women. I also love modified men and unmodified men. (Take that where you will, Dan.) Beauty doesn’t know a gender or a race or a whatever. Beauty knows only humanity, and that’s what we ought to be praising. Stay beautiful, kids.





Join me on
Facebook
and
Twitter
and
Google Plus!



1 comment:

  1. I can remember wanting to get a full back tattoo done at a very young age. I researched and knew what I wanted down to the type of ink I wanted used but at that time was still very invested in my mother's opinion. She was fine with tattoos...I thought. Once it came time to get a tattoo her only support of it would be shown IF it was something "feminine" and IF it could be hidden. What the hell does feminine even have to do with it?

    In some cultures tattooing a fertile female is thought to be the only way to "cool" off her powerful natural energy. Mouths, tongues, lips and gums are deeply soaked in indigo in order to ground the women in the community to the earth and make them "safe" to be among men. I don't know why I added that in there..Just another perspective on the topic I suppose. I spent a LONG time researching body modification over the years and I've traveled and I can tell you that this opinion of tattooed women varies so much from culture to culture. What you are unfortunately talking about is a Western view-point and it is vastly becoming dominant. Such a sad reality we face. Oddly enough however the tattooing industry is booming with TONS of mediocre artists who further push those negative opinions into the foreground.

    I'm all about people looking any way they want as long as they are cool-beans on the inside if that makes sense

    ReplyDelete