Not trashy, but like any other piece of fashion or art, I like some and not others. I do not like the look of lots of random tattoos all over. Like a colorful cartoon character, next to a date in Roman numerals, next to an anchor, next to a flower. DH’s tattoos “match” in that they’re all black & gray, flow into each other, and they’re all in a similar style/theme done by the same artist. So basically no to Pete Davidson, yes to The Rock.

IME almost everyone I know has a tattoo who is under 50 (and plenty above). Or like 90% of people who are not very religious, and the number is lower on average for Jewish people, even not terribly religious.

But a LOT. There's a real generational divide. It was much more of a class/culture marker before the mid-late 1990s. I am 43, and people my age-- and especially younger-- seem overwhelmingly to have tattoos. But DH is 51, and from the same area (DMV) and only maybe 20-30% of his friends have tattoos. In my extended family including all descendants of great-grandparents, my parents' generation (mostly born <1965) has one or two members with tattoos. My generation (about 1965-1990) is like 70% tattooed.

My point being-- it's hard to generalize with such overwhelming numbers.

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes, yes, they come off as trashy (eg, “tramp stamp” above a thing strap). Sometimes, no.

I got a small, ugly flower (but not a cartoon or Chinese characters!) tattoo on my low hip in college. Thankfully it’s hidden. I’d remove it, but no one sees it unless I’m fully naked and the removal sounds very, very painful.

49, f

I got 3 small tattoos removed and a few years ago and it was not bad at all. Uncomfortable but very manageable. Not so painful that I wasn’t able to hold a conversation during the treatment and pretty quick since my tattoos were small. Mine were in black ink which I think takes fewer treatments to remove than color.

If it doesn’t bother you, no big deal but something to consider if you are sick of your tattoo and it is small. I did work with a girl with a very large back piece she wanted to remove and I think that was quite a bit more painful and time consuming as it was very large and colorful.

I somehow manage to see more beauty in a blank linen stretched canvas than paintings so I am not into tatoos. I see them as a visible chip on your shoulder, like being way into cross fit, heavy make up, couples dying their hair all black, combat boots or owning a pit bull. It's not bad or good, just not my style for the time being.

I do not like them.

But most people I know who have them DGAF that other people don't like them, and honestly I sort of admire that.

I just can't imagine enjoying the same thing on my body at 25 and 60.

Trashy.

Good marker of the self-obsessed though = useful external warning sign when dating.

47M

44F

Not trashy. Then again, I’m not a judgmental see you next Tuesday.

I don’t love everyone’s tattoos, especially horror or explicit ink- but it isn’t my body and isn’t my business. I would expect that explicit tatts be covered in a workplace.

Anonymous wrote:No

52yo F, I have no tattoos

I think lots of tattoos is a sign that person had trauma in their life. Tons of tattoos is a form of self harm like cutting.

Then I should have full sleeves, a tramp stamp and (of course) finger tats. I have none, but I have suffered trauma. In college, the tribal bicep tattoo were popular, but I could see the future. I made a lit of bad decisions in life, thankfully, getting tatted up was not one of them!

A round tattoo on a man's bicep or upper should is sexy as hell. Women with tattoos....not hot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No

52yo F, I have no tattoos

I think lots of tattoos is a sign that person had trauma in their life. Tons of tattoos is a form of self harm like cutting.

I have noticed this -- people who have tattoos have reason for getting it, and among people I know it is often, not always, related to trauma or mental health. The more of your body you cover with tattoos, the higher the likelihood people will assume you have issues. A study on that assumption would be interesting.

Interesting, now that you mention it: it would make sense that they would want to advertise trauma if you need to process out loud

Anonymous wrote:Trashy. But I don’t judge or think they are a class indicator. Most people get them as young adults and young adults of every class do dumb things.

I agree. It would be hard for a person to look MORE classy with a tattoo.

For the most part, they are ugly. Fine if you want to get something very small that is well hidden but I found any tattoo that is visible to be ugly. They won't age well as the person gets older.

46f

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t like most tattoos, but I don’t think they’re trashy. People who use the word trashy, though…

-43 yo woman

Using “trashy” to describe tattoos is the exception to this rule.

Nope. No exceptions.

Anonymous wrote:I think on young people who have a boho look well designed and executed black tattoos can look good and fit their aesthetic. The hipster look with tons of tattoos, thick rimmed glasses etc comes off as dated. Young male professional athletes with tattoos are hot (to me).

I think as people age it gets harder to pull off tattoos and they very, very rarely add positively towards anyone’s appearance.

I definitely don’t see them as a class indicator but I do see them as indicative of a person’s taste.

I’m 32f

Caleb Dressel. He is a demi-god and his tattoos look hot.
Agree that on most people they don’t look good and/or trashy.

Sometimes, yes, they come off as trashy (eg, “tramp stamp” above a thing strap). Sometimes, no.

I got a small, ugly flower (but not a cartoon or Chinese characters!) tattoo on my low hip in college. Thankfully it’s hidden. I’d remove it, but no one sees it unless I’m fully naked and the removal sounds very, very painful.

49, f