Anonymous wrote:I don't know if I count as a millenial but I was born in 1980. That makes me 40 this year. Wonderful.
Tattoos are certainly more common and accepted than 20 years ago. But they still carry some stigma. They're still far less common among the educated UMC circles I grew up with and still live/work with. Some people do have tattoos, but it's not on the scale or prevalence as among other socio-economic groups. And another key divider is the kind of tattoo you have. The type of tattoo you have and its visibility carries far more stigma than whether you have a tattoo or not.
I won't deny I don't care for tattoos and think them silly and it does affect my perception of the person who has a tattoo. I remember the time I saw a young girl walking down the street with a tattoo of a coffee cup on her arm. A coffee cup!? But at the same time it wouldn't affect how I treat you or judge you.
And I'm also going to admit this despite the controversy it will probably invoke in some of you, but living in an urban area with plenty of tattooed younger people, there is significant relationship between the natural attractiveness of a woman and the lower likelihood that she has a tattoo. So many of the heavier and not so attractive young women have tattoos, and bigger and multiple tattoos at that.
I find this to be true. Tattoos that are visible under regular clothing (short or long sleeve shirts, or knee length skirts) to be distracting and unprofessional, a lot of tattoos can be done very well and very artistic. Most people who are good looking don't bother to tattoo where others will see it during the workday; they also don't tend to get heavily pierced either.
I've observed that there is greater acceptance of tattoos, but most people who have visible tattoos tend to be less attractive and use the tattoos to get attention.