I'm with jackslash, in that I have no tattoos, either. But I'm also with motorhead in that money talks. But in general, I have to agree. My last non-stripper sex partner didn't have any, either.
I have found that girls with tattoos and piercings get turned on by spanking (I am not into physical abuse). I was getting a dance from a looker with a few piercings and tattoos and she asked me to slap her butt in the dance area. I got the impression that she really liked it. We later got a Champagne room and I again spanked her at her request and went a little beyond her request. She turned into an animal in heat, got dripping wet and attacked me (first time I ended up completely naked in the CR). Afterward she did not remember to ask for her dance fee, I paid her anyway with tip as I wanted an encore. How many others have found that spanking turns many dancers on.
There are certainly chicks with tats who will fuck for money. But I think the type of chick who actually gets (naturally) wet for a guy because he has money is much less likely to be into tats.
I think tattoos are great for ugly chicks. I mean, why not? To me, tattoos (that is, artwork) on a hot chick are like bacon on a good burger. Both are appealing by themselves. When you put them together, you don't get the combined appeal. One distracts from the enjoyment of the other. You end up with less total enjoyment than you would enjoying them separately.
What's the difference between people with tattoos and those without?
People with tattoos don't give a shit that you don't have any.
I "theorize" (that's a satirical use of the word, for those who missed it) that the most virulent detractors of tattoos are just too chicken shot to get one themselves, so they feel the need to put down those who aren't such pussies. At least I'm honest enough to *admit* why I don't have any.
@Tiredtraveler: WRT your observation about pain, I've noticed the same thing. Except I *do* like abusing those who like to be abused. :)
As I posted before I'm not a fan of tats, in general, and large body covering tats in particular. The closer a woman is in my view to a 10 the more I dislike tats on her. BUT there have been exceptions: Personality and seductive flirtatiousness trump most attractive body art.
@gmd - Pain or no pain, I've zero interest in getting one,...or eating BBQ'd bugs, or going over Niagara Falls in a barrel.
Sideways observation: I've noticed [NOT hypothesized or theorized] that most women, when asked, often have very personal reasons for tats rather than as adornment for the purpose of increasing sexual attractiveness.
Rough outer personality girls with tattoos is hot. You are guaranteed a awild ride in the sheets. Usually girls with well endowed bodies have them. What demographic is your theory based on because girls with tats care more for a muscle biund gentleman rather than a guy with more tats than her. Do you watch sons of anarchy by chance?
"I guess some people compensate with large vocabularies instead of large pick-ups."
Yeah, well, I need *something* that's large. And I have to admit, having the large brain instead of a large penis has helped me out a few times. It does have a wider application than a penis after all.
I might not mind tattoos if they weren't permanent and didn't cost so much to cover up if someone decides they don't want it anymore. I get tired of looking at the same thing all the time especially if it doesn't have to be permanent. There are some exceptions though.
I dont mind tattoos as long as their tasteful. I dont have one but I would get one if I found something that I liked. It would definitely have to be a work of art. I have seen dancers with lots of tattoos that looked good and have seen some with just a few that looked bad. My current GF, an ex dancer, has a few and all but the tramp stamp look good. However she likes them all.
I don't find tattoos on either sex attractive in any way. I find them to be unattractive. Hence I don’t have any and never will. I have expressed this opinion before.
29 comments
The only caveat is that money in the bank supersedes tatttoos. Each $10,000 is worth one tat.
... oh yes we're talking about strippers, ok then.
but I don't think this guy's tattoo ever helped him get laid - http://www.zunescene.com/zune-tattoo.jpg
Eye thank dat a beyotch don nevar gets al lubbed up fo no dude wit no inkk mi bros. whut u thank????
No, that's an hypothesis. If it was a theory, you'd have experimental evidence to back it up.
People with tattoos don't give a shit that you don't have any.
I "theorize" (that's a satirical use of the word, for those who missed it) that the most virulent detractors of tattoos are just too chicken shot to get one themselves, so they feel the need to put down those who aren't such pussies. At least I'm honest enough to *admit* why I don't have any.
@Tiredtraveler: WRT your observation about pain, I've noticed the same thing. Except I *do* like abusing those who like to be abused. :)
@gmd - Pain or no pain, I've zero interest in getting one,...or eating BBQ'd bugs, or going over Niagara Falls in a barrel.
Sideways observation: I've noticed [NOT hypothesized or theorized] that most women, when asked, often have very personal reasons for tats rather than as adornment for the purpose of increasing sexual attractiveness.
Agree.
I notice on the beach in Cali that the college girls playing volleyball have no tats, or hard to see tats. The single moms have large tats.
Yeah, well, I need *something* that's large. And I have to admit, having the large brain instead of a large penis has helped me out a few times. It does have a wider application than a penis after all.
@lopaw: Gah! I can't *believe* you gave away the secret here in public! Whatsoever the matter with you? :)