Talk:Lower-back tattoo

	Body Modification (defunct)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Body Modification, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Body ModificationWikipedia:WikiProject Body ModificationTemplate:WikiProject Body ModificationBody Modification articles

The first world problems entry is removed as original research, yet this stays? Delete, Delete, Delete.

I think the gallery should be romoved. Wikipedia isn't a gallery for tramp stamps. One or two pictures would suffice. 129.120.244.58 01:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, although one or two illustrative photographs in the article would be useful. I've removed fair use images or images with uncertain copyright status or source, since they shouldn't be in galleries anyway. ~MDD4696 19:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's good! I just rubbed one out to the artical! NARF! 75.22.35.213

I removed the gallery. There are already two pictures in the article itself. Isquitenice 19:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

why is it that its a tramp stamp? what if your not a tramp and just like tattoos there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.16.15 (talk • contribs) 10:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it called a Wifebeater (shirt) if you don't actually beat your wife? It's slang. That's all there is to it. Dismas|^(talk) 19:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

why is she called a carpet chewer if it's not actually a carpet she's chewing? same thing. 68.123.46.53 17:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The tramp stamp definition was fair valid at one point in time (pre-1980s) but fashion changed to where the association has changed. It is probably still true that it is a mark of social and certain degree of sexual liberation. But tattoos are no longer exclusive to to the complete amoral multiple partner-prostitution culture especially in the socially active under 40-50 group.

This is a prime example of a topic that needs many more citations from reputable research sources. My limited non-citeable, first person experience says that the author has their time lines wrong. Popularity began rising in the non-tramp groups in the early to mid-1980s. By the mid-1990s it became almost a fashion necessity among the elite of the middle American social crowd. And by the early to mid-2000s multiple tats became a standard for all but the most conservative young celebrities. But again IMHO this guess work needs some comprehensive and scientific research sources for cited to confirm this. 69.23.121.234 (talk) 05:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You couldn't be more wrong; tattoos, and tramp stamps specifically, were generally NOT acceptable in the early to mid-1980's with respect to most youth groups with the exceptions of specific instances; the concept was to NOT be 'like everyone else', tattoos were from a hippie/inmate culture, and (for example) the goth culture of the 1980's (old goth) would have burst something laughing at the concept of sheeple getting tribal armband tattoos and tramp stamps en masse, and other counter-cultural movements would have wholly supported tattooing UPC codes to point out how those who do it are more like stupid sheep than anything else. The following generation, however, started making such shite acceptable, and that is when everyone began branding their bodies with 'art' that no-one with any taste would as much as hang on their wall. Tribal armbands, Celtic patterns, Chinese lettering, and the like became the new fad, followed by whole/half sleeves, and so forth. In this way, Raunch Culture inserted itself into other cultural movements, and those same flavour-of-the-moment sheeple getting tribal armbands and tramp stamps were unfamiliar with the *actual* culture, and mistook a subset as *the* culture. You cannot rely on sheeple to tell you what is 'in'; they are CONSUMERS of the lives of others, and have only the most superficial assessments of what they see. They are studying what to consume, not attempting to study the origins/preserve the purity of any cultural movement. By the late 90's/early 2000's, tattoos became exceedingly common to the point we are today. Hardly a 'fashion accessory' by 2010, multiple/conglomerate/excessive tattooing is a fad that will have run its course in the next few years, receding back into Raunch Culture simply because it is so common, and a rejection by the younger generation as they come into their own purchasing power. This is a reverse Prole Shift, to a great extent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.157.25.68 (talk) 20:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Generally, a lower back tattoo will be designed to emphasize the shape and curvature of the female figure." Not in my experience! Most of the ones I've seen (Hundreds, easily, if not thousands) are cookiecutter splats of butterflies, Tao circles, or sonething else that was NEITHER applied NOR designed with the particular young lady's physique in mind. The ones the author of the above sentence are thinking of are expensive, require custom work, and can't just be slapped on there on an evening's lark with one's clone friends. 68.123.46.53 17:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other moral qualms arise if said female is hanging out with her own clones. Nidht (talk) 21:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO The comment was not meant in the spirit of disguise or creating optical illusion to fake a better curve. The comment was mean in the sense of drawing attention and causing one to linger on a particular area of a woman's shape and curvature. To be blunt the lower back is one of the last places to get fat thus showing the curvature of a healthy spine and pelvis. Additionally if the person is well-shaped the narrowing of the waist is also centered while viewing the tattoo. 69.23.121.234 (talk) 05:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In German they are called "ass antlers"!! haha!

Ass Antlers = "Arschgeweih". Heiko242 (talk) 12:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The term "tramp Stamp" is know worldwide now as the term for women who degrade their lower back area with a tattoo. The council of the American Medical Association had decided that this term is common with females. There are medical considerations that are not typical when a woman is need of surgery. The ink can cause infection and deters specific medical treatment to those with this type of tattoo, based on its location on the body.

Most men know that if a woman has a tattoo of this kind, that they are somewhat "easy" and not very educated. When a woman decides to get a tattoo, they want to bring instant notification to the public that they have a special mark upon their body and this is a turn off for men. So if women are going to get this type of tattoo, they need to understand that they will be judged by the tattoo and area of the marking.

"During the Game Design Challenge at the Game Developer's Conference in 2006, Gears of War designer Cliff Bleszinski publicly referred to lower back tattoos on women as 'tramp stamps.'"

I'm sure many more famous people have uttered "tramp stamps." Why is this guy the one quoted? Seems like insignificant trivia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.246.125.135 (talk) 01:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Such a pre-1985 opinion. Got to be someone over 50. And the AMA comment is BS. Once the tat heals without infection I would wager only 2% of doctors would have any "medical" consideration (hey there are quacks in every occupation). And I would bet most those "medical considerations" are how much extra money they can get from a patient that does not want their tattoo ruined and thus requires an alternative surgical access. Truthfully other than skeletal trauma to the lower back or pelvis, I doubt that many medical procedures ever deal with the skin of the lower back.69.23.121.234 (talk) 05:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Within the past few years, tattoo artists and doctors have questioned the safety of administering epidurals to pregnant women who have lower back tattoos.[1] However, such concerns have largely been discredited,[2], since there are countless[citation needed] women with lower back tattoos who have successfully undergone childbirth with epidurals and experienced no side effects.[citation needed]"

The fact that there are countless people who have suffered no ill-effects is not enough to discredit it. The fact that thousands of people smoke without getting lung cancer does not mean the smoking does not cause cancer. Some specialist (non-popular-press) sources would be good. --Taejo|대조 13:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve added (rather, restored) the reference from the Mayo Clinic, which User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters removed in this edit.

It’s a common concern, so worth mentioning.

213.162.124.78 (talk) 02:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Rocks and Pepsi all over again. Of course the problem with such scares is that there is no proposed scientific mechanism for a concern in the first place. The fear is based on realizing that you totally ignorant about chemistry and concluding therefore that "bad magic" can happen and that further no scientist or chemistry student would perform the 30 minute experiment and report bad results.

Specifically there is no reason to believe that standard tattoo inks would chemically react with epidurals. For laymen consider this. Tattoo Inks are generally stable in the human body and also usually simple chemical compounds...both of which are first order indicators that the ink is unlikely to react with the epidural which is NOT stable in the human body. Now if tattoo inks where not stable in the human body (i.e. refilled weekly by nanobots) then in that case I might want to ask if epidural might react with tattoo ink.

Without specific incidents to start an investigation such fears of the ignorant are similar to thinking racial skin color or simply your last name might make epidurals work differently. Yes weird things based on genetics, sunlight exposure, and million other things can in very rare cases change drug interactions -- but such phobias cannot economically be tested for everything (billions of unlikely tests possible). And once the question was asked about tattoo ink and epidural drugs, It would have taken about 10 seconds thought from someone generically familiar with the chemical makeup of both substances to conclude they should not chemically react. An experiment would have taken maybe 5-30 minutes and any negative result would have made immediate FDA newspaper headlines. And yet the chemically ignorant are still not sure enough has been done.69.23.121.234 (talk) 06:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HALP!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.94.7.33 (talk) 20:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

strongly seconded. i added Template:sources. it seems most applicable, given my limited knowledge of these templatey things. --24.225.128.134 (talk) 23:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was it a man or a women who came up with that slang? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.43.219.134 (talk) 19:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard it called "reading material", but I don't think it's relevant to the article. -Jaz Mcdougall not bothering to log in —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.121.46 (talk) 02:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the tattoos first became widespread in the porn industry back in the day, as a way for actors and actresses to stop editors from copy-pasting parts of different movies they starred in into other movies as filler or money shots (without crediting/paying them for their appearance in the cuts). Since they had tattoos in the lower regions, they would show on the film and you'd notice it wasn't the same girl in the whole scene. This could be the source of the slang. 81.227.51.82 (talk) 06:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't this type of tattooing begin as a way for pornographic actresses to identify and copyright their work even when their faces are not visible? Maybe that's an urban legend? --98.199.37.31 (talk) 19:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you source it?

I'm trying to start a Wikiproject on Body Modification, if anyone wants to join go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Body_Modification ScarTissueBloodBlister (talk) 02:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'..during intimate moments.."? That's a stupid euphemism for sexual intercourse. I hate it as a euphemism because it implies a sense that intimacy only means sex - but what about emotional intimacy apart from or devoid of sex? I also hate that as an aside in this article because it has no relevance whatever to the article. And this is how this tattoo relates to sex, and this is how this tattoo relates to the price of tea in China, and this is how the tattoo relates to UFOs, and this is how the tattoo relates to my grandma and/or all of these things.. DELETING. --69.169.131.217 (talk) 12:21, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article on "Tramp Stamps" at Flisted.com, at one point suggests there might be some historical basis for the markings which sounds dubious but if there were corroborating sources for it and other things mentioned they might be used to expand this article.