Inked Talk

For months Inked Talk has featured a number of articles on the dangers of henna tattoos that have been altered with a substance called PPD to make the tattoos look darker. The high concentration of PPD in the henna mixture causes a strong allergic reaction in a good percentage of the population. These allergic reactions can lead to a sensitization to further exposure to PPD, which is found in lower quantities in hair dye, certain textile and leather dyes, and other pigments.

Inked Talk brought the first of these articles in February of 2008. A news story from England prompted a second story about henna and PPD allergies in July. The latest article from the UK may sound like a repeat, but yet another child in Bristol was scarred badly by a Bart Simpson henna tattoo laced with PPD.

(Yes, that’s Bart Simpson scooting a towel across his backside. Not only will this boy have a scar in the form of a pop culture icon that is likely to be long since passé by the time he gets into high school, but he has one of the tackier Bart images that he could have chosen. Poor kid.)

You can read the full article here.

Regular Inked Talk readers know that I get up on a soap box over PPD at every opportunity, so I don’t want to beat a dead horse too badly today. However, if you must have a henna tattoo, or if for some reason you feel you must have one applied to a child, be absolutely certain that the tattoo artist does not use henna laced with PPD. The good henna tattoo artists - and there are many - are well aware of the dangers of PPD and wouldn’t think of applying PPD to the skin. Talk to the artist first, ask questions, and proceed only if you feel comfortable with the answers.

Recent statistics have suggested that one in four adults aged 18-30 have a tattoo. As tattoos have become more mainstream, laser tattoo removal procedures have likewise made great strides, and the result is more people having tattoos removed now than ever before.

A study led by Myrna Armstrong of Texas Tech University suggests that women are more likely than men to undergo laser tattoo removal. Armstrong’s team visited tattoo removal clinics Arizona, Colorado, Massachusetts and Texas to find out who was undergoing tattoo removal procedures, and why. Armstrong’s study consisted of just 196 people.

Above photo: tattoo removal in progress, courtesy of http://www.immortalimagestattoo.com

Sixty-six men and 130 women were interviewed for the study. In addition to demographic information, they answered questions about why they got the their tattoos, and why they were seeking removal. The most popular reasons for getting a tattoo were to commemorate an occasion and to feel “unique” and “independent.”

Women who were white, single, college-educated and between the ages of 24 and 39 were the most likely to seek removal of their tattoos. Their reasons for removal included suffering embarrassment from the tattoo, lowering of body image, getting a new job or career, having problems with clothes, and experiencing stigma. While men reported some of the same problems, they did not appear to suffer the same external pressure that women did. This led the researchers to conclude that society may be less supportive of women’s tattoos.

This author has to add her two cents to that conclusion. Anyone who has taken a basic statistics class knows the phrase “correlation does not equal causation.” In other words, an apparent correlation between two things does not suggest that one causes the other. My favorite pop culture example of this is the famous “Pirates vs. Global Warming” chart:

The chart shows that as the number of pirates has decreased, the average global temperature has increased. While the chart is comedic, it illustrates the point that just because two appear to have a correlation, you cannot conclude that one causes the other.

So what does this have to do with Armstrong’s study on tattoo removal?

The conclusion that societal pressures lead to women seeking tattoo removal more often than men is misplaced. Simply because more women cite societal pressure for tattoo removal doesn’t mean that societal pressure towards women is the cause. What about tattoo placement? Are women more likely to get a tattoo that isn’t easily concealed in the workplace? Or perhaps the societal pressure is equal among the sexes, but women are more likely to succumb to that pressure.

Or perhaps there is another explanation entirely.

While Armstrong’s sample size for this study may be too small to be conclusive, perhaps a more interesting study would have examined the correlation between the reason for initially getting the tattoo and its ultimate reason for removal. Perhaps women are more likely to get a tattoo that is relatively meaningless to them to start with, thus making the decision to have it removed less monumental and more akin to a change of wardrobe.

Armstrong’s study, while interesting, is just the beginning. A larger sample size and questions that examine the relationship between the reason for the tattoo in the first place and the reason for its removal may be more telling.

Writer Dan Kline’s July 8, 2008 column discusses what he feels is the overuse of the American flag on everyday products - clothing, bandanas, and of course tattoos. While he acknowledges that the patriotic intentions may be benevolent, the use of the American Flag on anything but a flag is inappropriate and perhaps even disrespectful. From his article:

I hardly think tattoos, bikinis, bandannas and the like actually show respect for what the flag stands for. If you respect the flag as a symbol representative of all that we love about America, than fly it properly, salute it when you walk by and think regularly of the men and women who died for your freedom.

I have to disagree with Mr. Kline’s assessment of the American Flag tattoo, for a number of reasons.

For many of our men and women in the armed forces, a tattoo is a rite of passage, a symbol of their time and experiences serving this country. What better emblem for such a tattoo than the American flag - the symbolic embodiment of the very freedoms that they serve to protect? I’m not about to tell a Marine that his American Flag tattoo isn’t an appropriate tribute to his nation.

September 11, 2001 had a huge impact on all Americans, and it inspired great patriotism among our citizens. Some people chose to get patriotic tattoos to memorialize the day. I certainly wouldn’t call those permanent reminders of a day that has been burned into our collective memories an inappropriate use of the flag. And I’m certainly not going to lump those beautiful tributes in with the “American Flag Underwear” the author jokes about in his article.

I think the author makes the mistake of thinking that a tattoo is just a fashion accessory, like the bandanas and swimsuits that he references in his column. Perhaps that is true for some people, but many more choose their tattoos because they represent something significant to them. And to many, the flag is those most significant symbol in their lives.

Readers, what are your thoughts?

I feel a little bit dumber every time I accidentally catch a few moments of TMZ or other celebrity-centric shows. It is as though my brain cells, one by one, commit seppuku, and I can’t say I blame them entirely. Today I visited TMZ.com for the first time because I had seen a link for a gallery of celebrity’s “Dumb Tattoos.” While I don’t favor coverage of celebrity tattoos, dumb celebrity tattoos could certainly be fun. I thought I’d be seeing a lot of bad ink, which admittedly there were a few “WTF” tattoos in the gallery. But the vast majority of the pictures were just tattoo photos, or worse: tattooless photos.

I guess this is why I don’t understand TMZ.

Sure, there were a few bad tattoos in the gallery. Everyone’s favorite whipping girl Britney has some faded looking dice on her wrist. Maybe she could fix those up when she’s done being nuts.

But on the next page they proceed to use this photo to mock Angelina Jolie’s tattoos:

I feel like I’m playing a game of “Where’s Waldo?”. What tattoo are they mocking in that picture? I don’t see it. Well…maybe that was a mistake. Certainly Angelina has tattoos - there are certainly enough pictures of them on other websites - but why use a picture featuring zero tattoos to mock someone’s tattoos? Maybe I’m missing something…perhaps those brain cells that died the last time I caught TMZ on television were the brain cells in charge of visual recognition of tattoos. Then again, it could just a fluke, a solitary mistake in their otherwise quality gallery.

No, wait, there are more invisible tattoos to mock.

A quick web search tells me that Mena Suvari has a tattoo on her back. So clearly this frontal picture is an excellent choice to mock her tattoo.

Maybe I’m not the one with the dying brain cells here.

And here’s another gem from their “bad tattoo” gallery:

Hmm. Maybe that goofy looking facial hair is really a tattoo?

I’m the last person you’d see criticizing another website on this blog because my purpose here is to talk ink, not to bash other sites. But dammit TMZ, don’t tease me by proclaiming to have a whole gallery of bad celebrity ink only to show me more generic pictures of Angelina Jolie and Johnny Depp.

Ah well. Thanks for reading.

-Jenn

***
Parenting Teens Blog