Cheat on a tattoo artist, get pooped on....

[greg1647545532]

An incorrect tattoo is the same as cutting off a part of someones body? :dumb:

 

They're both unwarranted disfigurement in retaliation for butthurt, intended to permanently shame the victim. In other words, they serve the same function. In other words, they're not the same, but they're functionally not much different, which is what I said the first time around. I use words for reasons, maybe you should read them.

[Not Brian]

Well that must stink.

 

3/10

[Dr. Pomade]

3/10

 

<3/10

[Trouble Maker]

<3/10

 

<3

<=3

<===3

<====3

:lolguy:<====3

:lolguy:====3

:lolguy:===3

:lolguy:==3

:lolguy:=3

:lolguy:3

:fa:

[Trouble Maker]

They're both unwarranted disfigurement in retaliation for butthurt, intended to permanently shame the victim. In other words, they serve the same function. In other words, they're not the same, but they're functionally not much different, which is what I said the first time around. I use words for reasons, maybe you should read them.

 

You are equating a tattoo which can be covered up with a shirt to someone getting their ears and nose cut off. You clearly don't understand what the word functionally means. So I'm thinking it's a lost cause to try and discuss semantics with you.

 

The underlying issues also aren't the same, but again I'm guessing it's a lost cause to try and have a discussion with you.

 

Just in case anyone is interested, these are 2 pictures of what greg is saying is functionally the same thing.

 

http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv9wahoia61qar86bo1_500.jpg

 

http://cnnafghanistan.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/t1larg-bibi.jpg?w=640

[Dr. Pomade]

<3

<=3

<===3

<====3

:lolguy:<====3

:lolguy:====3

:lolguy:===3

:lolguy:==3

:lolguy:=3

:lolguy:3

:fa:

 

7/10

[greg1647545532]

You are equating a tattoo which can be covered up with a shirt to someone getting their ears and nose cut off. You clearly don't understand what the word functionally means. So I'm thinking it's a lost cause to try and discuss semantics with you.

 

I take it you find them to be *vastly* different levels of severity, as do I, but "she can put a shirt on" doesn't change anything about my stance. He still disfigured her in order to shame her. Anyone who doesn't see the connection to brutal tribal practices and the misogyny they exemplify needs to think about it some more.

 

You can just say, "Sorry, I didn't understand what you meant. You're right that tattooing shit on someone is 100% wrong, and everyone in this thread who is clapping for this guy is a grade A douchenozzle."

 

Or you can say "lost cause" a third time and go away.

[Not Brian]

http://cnnafghanistan.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/t1larg-bibi.jpg?w=640

 

Well that must stink.

 

nvm can't smell lol

[-Alex-]

Lmao

 

 

<3 this site

[RyM3rC]

I take it you find them to be *vastly* different levels of severity, as do I, but "she can put a shirt on" doesn't change anything about my stance. He still disfigured her in order to shame her. Anyone who doesn't see the connection to brutal tribal practices and the misogyny they exemplify needs to think about it some more.

 

Are you sure she didn't want that tatt-poo on her back? I mean, she did sign a release.

[Farkas]

The waiver is basically null seeing how she was under the influence and more than likely not aware of what she was agreeing to. I forget the actual term for such a thing, but without being aware and liable for her actions, which she can't be held for while under the influence, then the waiver means nothing.

[mjrsplat]

Next time she cheats, she'll likely be laying on her back hiding her tattoo. Should have cut that bitch's nose off.

[Trouble Maker]

I take it you find them to be *vastly* different levels of severity, as do I, but "she can put a shirt on" doesn't change anything about my stance. He still disfigured her in order to shame her. Anyone who doesn't see the connection to brutal tribal practices and the misogyny they exemplify needs to think about it some more.

 

You can just say, "Sorry, I didn't understand what you meant. You're right that tattooing shit on someone is 100% wrong, and everyone in this thread who is clapping for this guy is a grade A douchenozzle."

 

Or you can say "lost cause" a third time and go away.

 

I never once stated whether I agree with others in this thread or you on the OP being wrong or not so don't put words in my 'mouth'. I simply said comparing the two on a functional level is wrong. One girl can live a normal life, the other doesn't have a nose. It's downright disrespectful to the women who have been disfigured for doing nothing wrong to equate the two. For the record I do not think what was done is OK.

 

I agree 100% that this has similar societal/psychological undertones of "brutal tribal practices and the misogyny they exemplify" and is wrong on that level. I also never said up until this point whether I thought the men in these situations were driven by the same impulse.

 

While what was done to the tattoo chick was wrong and not equal in nature to what she did, I find it hard to feel bad for someone who cheats on another person and has something bad happen to them because of it. The woman was disfigured (nose and ears cut off) for trying to be free. So that woman did nothing wrong and had much, much worse done to her. She is also permanently disfigured and disabled. So yes, I don't see how it's possible to compare the two situations, even if they have similar undertones.

 

It's like the stereo being at a 1/10 versus a 10/10. It's a volume issue and you aren't appreciating the difference in volume by saying the two situations are the same.

[CRAWDAD]

I don't understand even pretending to think this guy is anything but an extreme cockface.

 

????

 

http://afrojacks.com/images/stories/penis%20nose.jpg

 

http://i2.bebo.com/044b/4/large/2008/07/23/01/2967421098a8409679894l.jpg

Edited November 30, 2011 by Not Brian
groce

[Green Bastard]

at least the tattoo is removable by laser, granted it would prolly still leave something behind but it would be coverable, woulda probably been much funnier if it were the "disappearing ink" that fades after 5 years, guess that would be long enough to teach a lesson and prolly not have to pay 100,000 dollars for revenge

[RyM3rC]

So was this was fake right? The whole story?

[Not Brian]

you tell us?

[RyM3rC]

Looks like it. i've heard a couple places so far. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/poop-tattoo-story-is-crap-8764319

 

That viral story about the Ohio man who purportedly tattooed a pile of excrement on the back of his wayward girlfriend?

 

Fake. Fake. Fake.

 

As the fable goes, “Rossie Brovent” was expecting her boyfriend, “Ryan L. Fitzjerald,” to ink a scene from “Narnia” on her back. Instead, having found out that “Rossie” had cheated on him, a vindictive “Fitzjerald” retaliated by delivering a tattoo of a steaming, swirly pile of excrement encircled by several flies.

 

“Rossie” claimed “Fitzgerald” tricked her into drinking a bottle of “cheap wine” and tequila shots, which incapacitated her for most of the time it took him to ink the tattoo.

 

According to the story--which is accompanied by a photo of the purported tattoo--“Brovent” this month filed a $100,000 civil lawsuit against “Fitzjerald.” The former couple are described as “trailer park residents” from Dayton in the story.

 

As seen above, the photo appears legitimate. In fact, it first surfaced online about 18 months ago as part of a “Worst Tattoo of the Day” post on the blog I Am Bored.

 

The image reappeared this week--complete with a backstory about the fractured love of “Rossie” and “Ryan”--on a sketchy “weird news” web site that appears to be dedicated to ginning up its Googe AdSense impressions.

 

A review of court indices, of course, shows no such civil complaint has ever been filed (either in federal or state court) by “Brovent.” James Druber, administrator of the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court (where Dayton residents file their six-figure complaints), said that he had heard nothing about the purported tattoo lawsuit.

 

Additionally, a review of the Nexis database turns up no “Rossie Brovent,” or, in fact, anyone with that surname. And a search for “Ryan Fitzjerald” (with or without the middle initial “L”) turns up nobody with that name.

 

Records for Dayton and Montgomery County show no evidence that “Fitzjerald” (or “Fitzgerald”) has been licensed as a tattoo parlor operator or employee, according to Alan Pierce, an official with the Public Health department.

[87GT]

Was just about to post the smoking gun link.

[justcause]

The fact that she was "dating" the artist and knows that everyone that gets a tattoo has to sign a waver will not help her cause. Since she signed the exact same waver everyone else does before the tattoo started. You can not blame him for her not reading the entire waver fully.