The tattooed lawyer Forum

[crazycanuck]

I'm curious what the tiger face guy does for a living, and what he used to look like before he got all altered.

Also, what was he like as a child.

[superserial]

I'm curious what the tiger face guy does for a living, and what he used to look like before he got all altered.

Also, what was he like as a child.

he probably got molestered.

[Lonagan]

I'm curious what the tiger face guy does for a living, and what he used to look like before he got all altered.

Also, what was he like as a child.

obvs

[ihatelaw]

Moral absolutism isn't dodgy? I'm sorry but this conversation started because Ray said that when people call him ignorant they are in fact (usually) the weird ones. That is a ridiculous claim to make (regardless of the fact that his views are created by a larger society).

How is it ridiculous to judge certain people as being weird, when most people in our society would make the same judgement?

There are enormous benefits to social conformity. It facilitates communication and understanding, by establishing common frames of reference for thought. It facilitates group cohesion, reducing conflict between members of the group. Humans, being fundamentally social creatures, have a natural instinct to both conform and expect others to do the same. It strains reason to assert that manifestations of such expectations are "ridiculous".

at the risk of hyperbole, many of the greatest minds in history deliberately flouted social convention in ways that were neither self-indulgent or inefficient.

Of course, the abolitionists were not being self-indulgent when they challenged the social conventions pertaining to the owning of slaves, etc. However, the guy at the Urban Outfitters wearing giant loops that stretch out his earlobes so you can put your hand through them is not flouting custom for the sake of advancing social justice. He's doing it to get attention, make a statement, or impress some counter-culture chick. I don't think it's ridiculous of me to call that inefficient and self-indulgent.

I think this conversation is kind of lame. Social conformity, culture, etc, blah blah...we get it, there are benefits to having people share a system of ideas. Tattoos, stretched ear lobes, nipple rings, whatever...really, these things have nothing to do with someone being weird, stupid, or *inefficient.* Self-indulgent? Yea, sure, but just as much as anything else that is done for the benefit of appearing a certain way.

You talked about how social conformity has benefits and then bash social conformity when its not the type that you like. Society has many sub-groups, and people with stretched ear lobes and tattoos is one of the bigger ones. People had a natural instinct to conform and they, like the girl who the guy was trying to impress, wanted people to do the same. A guy with stretched ear lobes is no different than the dude who puts on a lacoste polo - the only difference is which sub-culture they joined. Either way, its pretty pathetic to me when anyone from any one of these groups of people feels a need to bash another group because they look different. Its very....high school.

[GeesesAintTeethes]

I'm curious what the tiger face guy does for a living, and what he used to look like before he got all altered.

Also, what was he like as a child.

Tiger boy is a computer programmer and he is a representation of his totem animal. I believe he is Native America, so White people wouldn't understand what he did to himself.

[biggamejames]

Tiger boy is a computer programmer and he is a representation of his totem animal. I believe he is Native America, so White people wouldn't understand what he did to himself.

[bees]

I think this conversation is kind of lame. Social conformity, culture, etc, blah blah...we get it, there are benefits to having people share a system of ideas. Tattoos, stretched ear lobes, nipple rings, whatever...really, these things have nothing to do with someone being weird, stupid, or *inefficient.* Self-indulgent? Yea, sure, but just as much as anything else that is done for the benefit of appearing a certain way.

You talked about how social conformity has benefits and then bash social conformity when its not the type that you like. Society has many sub-groups, and people with stretched ear lobes and tattoos is one of the bigger ones. People had a natural instinct to conform and they, like the girl who the guy was trying to impress, wanted people to do the same. A guy with stretched ear lobes is no different than the dude who puts on a lacoste polo - the only difference is which sub-culture they joined. Either way, its pretty pathetic to me when anyone from any one of these groups of people feels a need to bash another group because they look different. Its very....high school.

You cannot pick and choose your social non-conformists based on which of them make you comfortable.

/thread?

[rayiner]

You talked about how social conformity has benefits and then bash social conformity when its not the type that you like. Society has many sub-groups, and people with stretched ear lobes and tattoos is one of the bigger ones. People had a natural instinct to conform and they, like the girl who the guy was trying to impress, wanted people to do the same. A guy with stretched ear lobes is no different than the dude who puts on a lacoste polo - the only difference is which sub-culture they joined. Either way, its pretty pathetic to me when anyone from any one of these groups of people feels a need to bash another group because they look different. Its very....high school.

You're using "social conformity" in a different way than I am. I'm referring to conforming to the standards of larger society, not those of small subcultures. There is a big difference between a guy wearing a Iacoste polo and a guy with stretched ear lobes. The former is acting within the social norms defined by the larger society, the latter is not. There is no need to over-intellectualize the argument here. There is a simple test: if you walk down the street and people stare at you, you're not conforming.

As for "bashing", I'm not personally attacking people for their choices. That would be pointless. Whether or not one person has stretched earlobes doesn't directly affect me at all. Rather, what I'm doing is lamenting the frivolous and self-indulgent attitudes of a generation of young people that leads to such behavior.

To use an analogy liberals can understand. When someone criticizes an SUV driver, it makes no sense to interpret that as an attack on the individual. One person's driving an SUV obviously has a negligible impact on society's gas consumption or pollution production. Rather, the proper way to interpret such criticism is see it as being directed at the underlying phenomenon, the mass of SUV drivers whose collective action has a negative impact on society or represents a negative attitude within society.

[MC Southstar]

I think this conversation is kind of lame. Social conformity, culture, etc, blah blah...we get it, there are benefits to having people share a system of ideas. Tattoos, stretched ear lobes, nipple rings, whatever...really, these things have nothing to do with someone being weird, stupid, or *inefficient.* Self-indulgent? Yea, sure, but just as much as anything else that is done for the benefit of appearing a certain way.

Weird is defined according to prevailing social standards, and so people with out-there body art are definitely weird. They're also inefficient --- they get their kicks by purposefully attacking social norms and group cohesion, in a way that doesn't serve any practical purpose.

You talked about how social conformity has benefits and then bash social conformity when its not the type that you like. Society has many sub-groups, and people with stretched ear lobes and tattoos is one of the bigger ones. People had a natural instinct to conform and they, like the girl who the guy was trying to impress, wanted people to do the same. A guy with stretched ear lobes is no different than the dude who puts on a lacoste polo - the only difference is which sub-culture they joined. Either way, its pretty pathetic to me when anyone from any one of these groups of people feels a need to bash another group because they look different. Its very....high school.

You're using "social conformity" in a different way than I am. I'm referring to conforming to the standards of larger society, not those of small subcultures. There is a big difference between a guy wearing a Iacoste polo and a guy with stretched ear lobes. The former is acting within the social norms defined by the larger society, the latter is not. There is no need to over-intellectualize the argument here. There is a simple test: if you walk down the street and people stare at you, you're not conforming.

As for "bashing", I'm not personally attacking people for their choices. That would be pointless. Whether or not one person has stretched earlobes doesn't directly affect me at all. Rather, what I'm doing is lamenting the frivolous and self-indulgent attitudes of a generation of young people that lead to such behavior.

I agree with what you're saying here ray. I think it is important to realize that the reason the attitude prevails is because it is such a fundamental rule of our society already. Your last statement demonstrates that believing a rule and observing it can be indistinguishable. Personally, I see nothing wrong with someone who chooses to express themselves a certain way as long as it is aesthetically pleasant to me. If it's something I find tacky or repulsive, I might judge them negatively. However, in practice, my personal preference is irrelevant because I must observe the unspoken rules of our society even if I don't believe in them. In that way, I find myself increasingly indoctrinated into the belief that arbitrary status symbols really reflect on a person's character when they did not need to in the first place.

On the other hand, not observing social rules is extremely costly and is a sign of irresponsibility, to some extent I agree. Conforming to a societal view might sound bad to a culture that also prides itself on individualism, but I think people usually do so because the conformity is just a means to another end. Those who choose not to conform are either truly oblivious or are intentionally breaking a rule. Many fall into the latter category, and I'm really disinterested in what their desired common identity is. I'd still prefer to actually be an individual and I find some counterculture to be sadly hypocritical.

EDIT: I also think subtlety tends to be more successful simply because it's easy to earn someone's hate but difficult to earn someone's respect based on first impressions. Draw attention to yourself by being too different, and your chances are simply better that you will be negatively judged by someone who doesn't personally approve of your lifestyle choices. This is also the reason why there's dress codes at places of business and office politics should independent of real politics. You just don't want unnecessary attrition over something "trivial" like self-expression. Some people think self-expression is the most important thing in the world, and they might go on to become a great artist or at least a starving hobbyist. Others might value pragmatism more (by that I mean money or social status, among other things) and just want better odds of success.

[bees]

And society will always be a struggle between people who are trying to move forward too fast (those with their stupid earrings) and those who would move forward too slowly or not at all (those who see nothing in the fact that some people wear stupid earrings other than irresponsibility).

Neither side is completely correct and each would create an unsustainable society without the other. Some of us just prefer the balance to be slightly more to one side or the other.

[MC Southstar]

And society will always be a struggle between people who are trying to move forward too fast (those with their stupid earrings) and those who would move forward too slowly or not at all (those who see nothing in the fact that some people wear stupid earrings other than irresponsibility).

Neither side is completely correct and each would create an unsustainable society without the other. Some of us just prefer the balance to be slightly more to one side or the other.

I prefer to try to find the middle ground so I can play with both sides. I just find it amusing. But certainly, it is the struggle of opposing forces that keeps society in a progressive balance. Isn't that what the legal profession is all about?

As for tattoos specifically (and not tiger men), I could really care less personally. I don't think it says anything about the person except that maybe they had more of a wild streak in their younger days. That's also only for visible tattoos. I have friends who specifically got tattoos in places that are concealable by clothing so that they could maintain a professional image. In general, I just see tattoos as an artistic form of self-expression when applied tastefully. So, while I understand the logic in ray's last statement, I don't necessarily FEEL the same way myself. I just won't get a visible tattoo because I don't want a bunch of rayiners prejudging me.

Tiger dude is just freaky. If you want to get a plastic surgery tiger face, you might be a nonconformist legend, but I'm still going to reserve the right to think you're insane.

[nematoad]

There is nothing ignorant about being skeptical about people who are different. It's a natural human reaction[/quote][/quote]

yet through reason you have the ability to move past that primitive way of thinking... honestly you'll most probably never change... wasted words

[superserial]

I just got a tat on my forehead for this thread. Take that, legal profession!

[biggamejames]

Putting a lot of effort into how you look is vain, effete and obnoxious behavior, whether that effort manifests itself in expensive clothes and high fashion or in tattoos and counterculture fads. Lots of people who do put forth that effort are actually decent, but they are decent in spite of (and not because of) their behavior.

[bilbobaggins]

People who flaunted social convention:

- MLK
- Ghandi
- Harvey Milk
etc. etc. etc.

Ray, what you just said is downright scary and completely off base. American should be a place where people push the boundaries, express themselves freely and live how they want to live. It's not about "being efficient" (as if this can be measured by my tattoos or anything else about how I look).

Seriously, this is like borderline Godwin's law invoking nonsense.

[Lonagan]

I just got a tat on my forehead for this thread. Take that, legal profession!

It's already been established this will only make you a better litigator.

[Renzo]

People who flaunted social convention:

- MLK
- Ghandi
- Harvey Milk
etc. etc. etc.

Ray, what you just said is downright scary and completely off base. American should be a place where people push the boundaries, express themselves freely and live how they want to live. It's not about "being efficient" (as if this can be measured by my tattoos or anything else about how I look).

Seriously, this is like borderline Godwin's law invoking nonsense.

All the sudden you're Ghandi because you put a bone through your nose?

Ray is right. Self-expression is mostly bullshit, and is a symptom of people who have been overindulged in thinking they matter.

[GeesesAintTeethes]

I just got a tat on my forehead for this thread. Take that, legal profession!

I, too, have a new forehead tattoo. It reads: Golden Casino.

[ak362]

I just got a tat on my forehead for this thread. Take that, legal profession!

It's already been established this will only make you a better litigator.

Is it the Harry Potter lightning bolt, by any chance?

[thebunk]

I'll bet money I am the most tattooed person on this board (almost 20% of my body surface).

i'll take that bet.

and self-expression may indeed be mostly bullshit, but to carry that attitude daily and employ it sweepingly is oppressive to all those who may be pushing the boundaries of normalcy and convention for legitimate personal reasons.

not saying here that tattoos are liberating the masses like Ghandi. but remember that beethoven's music was considered self-indulgent and obscene, van gogh's paintings were initially seen in the same way, and that women wearing pants was once regarded as an outrageous example of moral dissolution (self-expression through style at its finest).

ultimately, why judge people over something as trivial as appearance? just leave them be.

[DannyJames]

How have i missed this thread!

i have 14 tattoos and counting...while a couple were bad decisions (it happens), they have NO bearing on my intelligence. I could have swore this was 2009, why is having tattoos any sort of issue?

I will not be attending Loyola on 66K scholarship though, so I'm sure everyone at my TTT will not be shocked since the student body will be comprised of former garbage men and janitors

[Lonagan]

I'll bet money I am the most tattooed person on this board (almost 20% of my body surface).

i'll take that bet.

and self-expression may indeed be mostly bullshit, but to carry that attitude daily and employ it sweepingly is oppressive to all those who may be pushing the boundaries of normalcy and convention for legitimate personal reasons.

not saying here that tattoos are liberating the masses like Ghandi. but remember that beethoven's music was considered self-indulgent and obscene, van gogh's paintings were initially seen in the same way, and that women wearing pants was once regarded as an outrageous example of moral dissolution (self-expression through style at its finest).

ultimately, why judge people over something as trivial as appearance? just leave them be.

I enjoy Slonimsky's Lexicon as much as the next guy, but that is a tad overbroad.

[DannyJames]

I'm curious what the tiger face guy does for a living, and what he used to look like before he got all altered.

Also, what was he like as a child.

im not sure if it's him or another dude that is a "lizard" but one of them was a retired teacher. from the piece i saw, the man is loved by everyone in the town (i don't believe it's in the US)

[Renzo]

not saying here that tattoos are liberating the masses like Ghandi. but remember that beethoven's music was considered self-indulgent and obscene, van gogh's paintings were initially seen in the same way, and that women wearing pants was once regarded as an outrageous example of moral dissolution (self-expression through style at its finest).

ultimately, why judge people over something as trivial as appearance? just leave them be.

That's the key-- appearance is always trivial. If someone actually produced some work or thought or social commentary that was meaningful, I would defend that person. But I am pretty sure no one cares what Van Gogh wore while he painted, and I'm equally as sure no one would have cared what Dr. King had to say if he'd have dressed like a circus clown with a big red fake nose and floppy shoes that squeaked.

People's appearance is an outward manifestation of how they want others to perceive them. If you want to be taken seriously, look the part. If your mohawk is more important to you, fine-- but expect there to be consequences.

[cantaboot]

not saying here that tattoos are liberating the masses like Ghandi. but remember that beethoven's music was considered self-indulgent and obscene, van gogh's paintings were initially seen in the same way, and that women wearing pants was once regarded as an outrageous example of moral dissolution (self-expression through style at its finest).

ultimately, why judge people over something as trivial as appearance? just leave them be.

That's the key-- appearance is always trivial. If someone actually produced some work or thought or social commentary that was meaningful, I would defend that person. But I am pretty sure no one cares what Van Gogh wore while he painted, and I'm equally as sure no one would have cared what Dr. King had to say if he'd have dressed like a circus clown with a big red fake nose and floppy shoes that squeaked.

People's appearance is an outward manifestation of how they want others to perceive them. If you want to be taken seriously, look the part. If your mohawk is more important to you, fine-- but expect there to be consequences.

one of the most intelligent posts i've read thus far. I hated it when an acquaintance of mine whined about how people judged her on the sexy/ slutty clothes.

plus, i like your avatar.