Rant all my own

[mamadeb]

I understand that my quick is not your squick and your kink is not my kink, and so this is just a suggestion.

But I'm reading an rpg where, once again, someone is going to do body modification to prove undying love. This is a running theme in this rpg and so I shouldn't be bothered by it. Or I should stop reading it.

But. People. Come up with some other idea, please? Millions of people all over the world and throughout history have managed to show undying love without injecting ink under their skin or attaching bits of metal to various places. Really.

"Darling, I love you so much, I tattooed your name right here!"

"Your beautiful, perfect skin! Oh, no!"

Isn't that outlandish a reaction. Is it?

Comments

[roadnotes.livejournal.com]

(Okay, so I thought about being a human doily. That doesn't make me any more committed than someone who wears a ring on their finger, does it?)

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

You can take the ring off more easily, I guess. :)

That people choose to get pierced or tattoo'd is their business, and if their partners think it's romantic, that's cool.

It's a reaction to a lot of things, like someone wrote a story for me in a challenge, and since I didn't think to specify no body modifications, the wedding rituals (it was a wedding challenge) included branding. Which is about one of my biggest body mod squicks ever, which the writer couldn't know.

And a reaction to the possibility that a nineteen year old boy in an RPG might get his boyfriend's name tattooed on his wrist. Note that in this RPG, said nineteen year old has already magically bound himself to the boyfriend in order to save his life. And even that wouldn't bother me so much but the reactions of the readers are, "Ohhh, a wrist tattoo would be the most wonderful thing!"

And so I'm feeling lonely in my squickedness.

[mecurtin.livejournal.com]

names are bad ideas

IMHO names of blood relatives (e.g. "Mother", one's own children) are OK, but no matter how fond you are of a non-blood relative it's flamboyantly stupid to get their name as a tattoo. Exhibit A: Angelina Jolie.

The fiction writing part of me wonders whether someone -- not the beloved -- who also has that name can have magickal control over someone with a name tattooed on them.

This idea, I like.

edited

[roadnotes.livejournal.com]

My reaction to your first sentence is "And if, g-d forbid, it doesn't work, the person with the ring has one less set of scars/marks to deal with than I do," which may not make sense, since we're talking about commitment, but...

I suspect I'm not consistent, but then again, I didn't get my ears pierced at all until my mid-twenties, and the aforementioned ear piercing until I was almost 40, and it was in line with all the body modifications I was thinking of making for myself, anyway.

Branding squicks me, too, in ways that other bodymods don't. Burn scars are ugly.

And, even though a lot of my friends have done it, I think that 19 is too early to get a tattoo -- and that names are bad ideas.

(The fiction writing part of me wonders whether someone -- not the beloved -- who also has that name can have magickal control over someone with a name tattooed on them. Might be worth playing with.)

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Branding, to me, is something done to animals, not to humans.

And I do love that idea.

[sekhmets-song.livejournal.com]

Branding, to me, is something done to animals, not to humans.
I feel the same way. And it really bothers me, as a feminist (I know that doesn't apply in the boy-on-boy scenario, so much, but the power politics can still be present in any relationship). Branding of animals connotes ownership. The idea of branding a lover bothers me hugely. True lovers do not own each other. They are together because of an emotional bond, not some sense of proprietorship. To use an emblem of ownership to commemorate the bond really feeds into the negatives of patriarchy, to my mind.

[scribbulus-ink.livejournal.com]

Speaking as one of the players in that game whose character has indulged in body modification b/c I happen to like it -- I'm awfully sorry if it squicks you, and if your squick overshadows your enjoyment of the entire game, including the various plots, the suspense, the romance, the characters and their interaction, then yes, maybe you ought to stop reading. There are quite a few players who like body modification, and so I doubt this will be the last incident. You'll simply have to decide for yourself whether that is enough to take away the enjoyment of every other aspect of the game.

And ultimately, these are fictional characters. It would be a different matter if a real 19 y/o was considering getting his boyfriend's name tattooed anywhere on his body.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

As I said, body mods run through that RPG. If it squicked me enough that I needed to stop reading it, I would stop reading it.

It hasn't, yet, because it *is* funny and romantic and suspenseful and generally enjoyable to read *despite* all the bits of metal and ink. I'm certainly not telling you to not do it - ultimately, you're writing the rpg for yourselves, not the watchers and I understand that. You do what's fun for you.

I just needed to say it. It's such a common thing these days that people forget that body mod *can* be a squick to some people.

[scribbulus-ink.livejournal.com]

I didn't think you were telling us not to do it. :) You said that perhaps you ought to stop reading because of the squick factor, and I was saying "yes, maybe so" because I know the players and their kinks, and I know the body mod isn't going to go away.

I just needed to say it. It's such a common thing these days that people forget that body mod *can* be a squick to some people.

So... I'm not clear on your purpose here. If everyone is within their rights to write about whatever kink floats their boat, why is reminding them that it can be squicky to other people necessary? I'm not trying to be wanky; I just don't get it. I'd assume you were blowing off steam in your own journal, except that line makes it sound like you're trying to do more than vent your own frustration.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Honestly, if I were going to stop reading, I wouldn't have posted at all. I would have quietly unsubbed from the watching community and unbookmarked the page.

It's several things. The big one was to vent. But it is necessary to remind people about squicks - people *forget*. *I* forget that things that aren't squicky to me might be to other people.

And, yes, to encourage writers to show other forms of devotion. The bond I mentioned in a comment is a case in point - I bought the reason and the results and it was done beautifully.

[scribbulus-ink.livejournal.com]

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. :) I don't think it's at all necessary to "remind" people about squicks; I don't see the point of that unless the purpose is to try to get them to stop writing it (which I realize isn't what you're saying). If something is a kink to one person, they're going to write it and post it, and it's not going to stop being a kink to them just because it's a squick to someone else. Speaking for myself, I know that quite a bit of what I write is squicky to some people; I don't forget that. But I'm not going to change what I write simply because I know that it's squicky for some people; I just assume they won't read it and move on, because I do happen to like it. I think most people are probably the same way. YMMV.

[mz-bstone.livejournal.com]

Except, most places you go, there's some form of tattooing or piercing. It's not an isolated thing. It's systemic. Historically, the cultures that do not engage in such practices are far less common that those that do.

Loki has a degree in athropology and did a major paper on this sort of stuff and the research was truly fascinating.

B

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Sure. US culture has had piercing forever, for example. My own ears were pierced when I was seven. I let them close up because I found earrings uncomfortable, but I've never been squicked by the idea.

But tattoos were not widespread in US culture until the nineties.

The sheer permanence of the marks is part of the problem - permanance but not immutability. I've seen old tattoos, and mostly they're faded and blue. People's bodies change, inks fade (although I assume inks have improved over the years) and the tattoo that was lovely on a twenty year old might not look so pretty on a fifty year old. (There's a recent Saturday Night Live commercial parody about a caustic substance to remove no-longer cool-looking lower back tattoos.) Piercings at most leave a tiny scar.

[redbird]

The inks have improved, and sunscreen has improved: not only the technology, but the understanding that it makes sense to protect skin from sun damage. That applies to non-tattooed skin as well, of course: the SPF 25 will help preserve my tattoos, but my dermatologist recommended it because she doesn't want her patients getting cancer.

[vass]

I don't have a squick about piercing or branding as such (some specific piercings, yes, but others I quite like) but reminding people of other possible characterisation choices is usually good. I mean, (bearing in mind that I don't even know which RPG you mean, and don't know the context) if character A gets a surprise tattoo to show his love, and character B is instantly and uncomplicatedly delighted, because wouldn't anyone be? That's a squick for me. The 'wouldn't anyone be?' is a squick. Perspectives are good. It's good that you spoke up, even though it isn't going to change the RPG, nor did you intend it too. You added another voice.

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Thank you! That was the point I was trying (apparently poorly) to make.

And I deliberately did not identify the rpg - those who are familiar with it will recognize it, but it's not important that anyone else do so.

[roadnotes.livejournal.com]

I got it, implicit in what you were saying. Which is why part of my comment was to agere, and observe that there are people who like some bodymods, and are still squicked by others, and squicked by the default assumption that everyone will like them.

And the plot bunny I suggested seems to have grabbed me by the throat and is pinning me to the ground, saying, "DO SOMETHING WITH ME."

("It would be a lot easier to DO SOMETHING if you let me breathe, you know....")

[darthhellokitty.livejournal.com]

I was 40 when I had my first (and only so far) tattoo of my totem animal, Hello Kitty. Of course I chatted with the tattoo artist the whole time, and the subject of names came up - she won't do them, and says tattoo artists won't. It's not just due to possible regret - some believe that a name tattoo actually *dooms the relationship*. True or not, I do know a couple of people who would rather not have certain names/symbols from the past...