OT- Kids tattoos....ummm WHAT????

[Tiger926]

I'm curious how many people are going to think I deserve the Worst Mom of the Year Award for buying my daughter a hair streaking kit? (Okay, so it was from the Easter Bunny. )

Do temporary streaks in her hair at preschool qualify her for being in the "high risk" group?


Seriously, though... I've got several big tattoos... I regret most of them and oddly enough, I grew to be quite a conservative looking/dressing/acting person. People find out I have a tattoo and they are shocked. I mean SHOCKED... but when I was in high school (1990-1994) I had shocking blue streaks in my hair and I thought it was pretty funny when my daughter started begging for blue and pink streaks (courtesy of a Barbie movie in which one of the characters had them) so I bought her the kit so she could have them, too.

I am genuinely curious if you guys would put temporary colored streaks on par with fake tramp stamps and virgin jello shots? I'm trying to decide if I will allow her to wear them to school tomorrow.

I for one have no issues with any colour of hair, or style of hair as it's not my business to tell you what colour or style of hair you should be wearing - I think it's ridiculous that people make judgments of people based on hair style or colour. You can't know a person until you meet and interact with them - the whole judging a book by its cover thing is ridiculous - whether it's tattoos, hair colour or spikes in ears. Your child is young and wants to colour her hair for fun - there is no sexual connotation like with the backside tattoo, so for me, it's a totally different issue.

There are several different aspects to this thread: age appropriate behaviour in regards to not making sereious adult activities childlike or fun, and, judging books by their covers. I think I've made myself clear in regards to the adult activities, but judging books by their covers is nothing I ever do. Example - I've taught several murderers full of tattoos & piercings - yup, you read that right - and if I had pre-judged them based on this, I wouldn't have seen how polite and kind they were to me as their teacher. They had anger and social issues outside of the classroom on nights that they were drunk & high, and this caused them to make seriously bad decisions to harm other people. The colour of their hair and their multitude of tattoos had nothing to do with the kind of students they were. That being said, we do ask students to cover up offensive (racist, sexist or alcohol/drug positive slogans) clothing or tattoos because it helps us keep social harmony.

This continues to be a very interesting thread in regards to how parents understand their roles as parents.

Tiger

 

[_queenie_]

I do have to admit, I really thought I'd made a terrible mistake when I saw how he pierced them -- when mine were done they used an air gun to shoot the earring in to create the hole -- when DD had hers done, the earring was actually placed on a syringe-like thing and the pressure of the doctor pushing is what pierced the ear. (Absolutely barberic ). Once he did the first one, I didn't really think I had an option not have the second one done.

They still do that (or did only in '95/'96)?
I specifically chose to have my DD3.5's done at the dermatologist because I remembered seeing poster that said they use a special gun that's supposed to be extremely safe and painless. She cried a little the first time, but I don't think it was because of the pain, it was just the feeling.

 

[disney[xo]sweetie]

It doesn't surprise me at all. I have a DD that's 5, and she loves tattoos. I don't have any, but DH has 1. She has not asked to put them anywhere on her body but her upper arm (like daddy).

She has many friends with younger (than me...I'm old) parents that have tattoos in all sorts of places. Kids that age want to be like their parents and older kids. One of her friends has older cousins with the "tramp stamp" and she does put tattoos there too. To her it is no different than playing dress up in moms clothes.

5yo's don't put tattoos on because they think it's "hot" or whatever. It's dress up. I think it's the adult mind that puts the negative (or too grown up)spin on it.

i completly agree. i know that it might seem strange, but how much do they really know at this age? their dressing up, having fun, and BEING KIDS! they are innocent and little, they dont know about the "tramp stamp" or what it means. this is the opposite of growing up too fast. by showing the world their bum and tatoo, they arent caring what others think, which is being a kid.
but, i do see where you would get the immediate "oh my word, no" and i do respect that. i have twin 6 year olds and one is little miss modesty, and would never even think of showing her bum, but my other one oh i love her to death, but she takes after me in the ways i wish she wouldnt! she is the girl that would put a tatoo down there and show every person she sees! and i know that isnt the best thing to do, but as long as shes young, and no one cares, im alright. if what other people think of my 6 year olds butt is my only issue in life, i think im doing quite alright!

 

[Aidensmom]

Very interesting responses. As someone who hangs with teens all day - I'm a highschool teacher - I am confident in saying that some of you are missing the point. Alcohol, tatoos, piercings, are all adult activities. Letting a baby take a sip of alcohol or letting a 5 year old get a fake tattoo on her backside is not done in isolation -there is value attached to those activities, if not, why let them do it? Those activities mean something to the parents and the other adults they are putting the show on for, if it didn't, then that behaviour wouldn't be encouraged. If it were just an innocent little tattoo/sticker, then it would be on her hand, which is where my daughter gets hers - the backside is another whole ball of wax altogether.

I can assure you that most of my teens got the very same mixed messages that many of you are sending to your kids - a baby girl of 5 showing a tattoo on her backside is a mixed message for her, but it is a very clear message to the rest of us. It is sexualizing a young girl and that is wrong. Parents can trick themselves into thinking it's not, but it is what it is.

I would love for the parents on here who do shots with their kids (doesn't matter if it's juice or alcohol as the messages from that activity are the same) or tattoos (real or fake) to hear what my students learned from those activities at early ages. It's not just innocent fun, but it actually sends messages to kids that those activities are ok at young ages - that little girl obviously has seen her mother, aunt, babysitter, etc., engage in pulling down her backside to show off a tattoo, so she has done the same. If the mom knew this, she wouldn't have put the tattoo there, or, let her daughter see her showing her tattoo off to someone. The whole pulling down the pants thing and placing tattoos there in the first place is very common with my teens, Britney Spears, etc. - it's placed on the backside for a reason, and that reason is not something a baby girl of 5 should know anything about.

It's sad that so many parents don't realize that these 'innocent' activities are usually anything but until it's much too late. Any kind of adult activity such as drinking, tattoos, pretend smoking, etc. should not be dumbed down or made childlike at all, as it's a dangerous area to be in. How in the world are you going gto explain to your 13 year old who then wants to switch the jello or juice in the shot glass for alcohol, that it's wrong when you've been encouraging this fun behaviour for years? It's hypocritical and confused message parenting, and this is the worst of kind of parenting in terms of damage control.

Tiger

I used to get the candy cigarrettes at the candy store all the time when I was a kid (I don't know how old you are, but they were quite common when I was a child). I've never smoked. Never tried it. Never been tempted. I think these issues you have seen kids have are a bit more complicated than you make them out to be.

A tattoo on a 5 year old's rear doesn't alone condemn them to a horrible future. The only thing I find the parents guilty of here is not telling the child it is inappropriate to pull her pants down to show it off. And that alone doesn't give me the supreme knowledge to judge them as horrible parents.

 

[Pixeldust Fairy]

I dont buy the argument that placing a temporary tattoo on a child is making them more or less likely to be violated by a predator. Predators who feed off of children will look for any child. Whether they are dressed age appropriately or not. The predator is the one with the problem, as is the adult who looks at a child and labels them as tramp or what ever term they use. A child is a child.

That being said, I have 3 boys and my youngest is a girl. I have a responsibility to ALL of them to teach them. My kids are not allowed to have temporary tattoos at school, it is enough to get them sent home for the day. I have placed tattoos on my daughters leg or arm. Do I like them NO, but kids like them. My boys are having a surprise pirate themed birthday party and will be allowed to have pirate tattoos for that occasion. My boys also dressed up as pirates for halloween and were allowed to put them on then. I dont shelter my daughter more than my sons just because she is a girl. My responsibility is to ALL of them. Boys are just as much at risk. It may not have been a thought in this parents mind of the placement of the tattoo. The parents may have never thought that their child would pull down their pants to show the tattoo. Or they may have just been trying to hide it from others view, because of the negative attitude about tattoos in general.


And to tell you the honest truth, I have never heard the term "tramp stamp" being used, and feel its really in appropriate for an adult to refer to a child with this label.

 

[Aliceacc]

This is my point about predators:

The child in question has a tatoo in a place where she must lower her pants to show the tattoo. She can't see it herself; the only way anyone at all gets to see the tatoo is if she lowers her pants. So we can expect her to lower her pants to show the tattoo to anyone she wants to share it with.

This action-- lowering her pants to show off her tattoo-- goes against everything we try to teach our kids about privacy and sense of self. It breaks down some of the barriers we try to instill into our kids to protect them.

As a result, should that child someday find herself in the presence of a predator, this conditioning might put her more at risk. If she has been told to NEVER lower her pants to anyone but mommy and daddy and the doctor, with mommy or daddy present, she might have a better chance. If she has been told that it's sometimes OK to do for a laugh, or to admire a tattoo, then she might be more likely to be victimized.

Again, from my limited experience with a predator: he was not a stranger to the child he violated; he was a family member. He already had her trust and that of her parents. He wasn't a stranger in a dark alley; he was a family member and she was sleeping over with her siblings. So the child we're discussing, had she been related to him, might not have had a problem letting him apply a new tattoo or admire the old one.

The odds are against this scenario. Except that I know the predator in question and used to consider him a good friend. So it DOES happen.

Is it worth the risk for a laugh?? Or could that same tattoo have been applied to her arm where one and all could enjoy it without teaching her that it's appropriate to lower your pants??

edited to add: Also, just in case anyone is wondering, the person I'm discussing lives in a nice little town in middle America, a thousand miles from NYC. He is probably the last one anyone would think of as a predator. He's mild mannered and polite, friendly and easy to talk to. He makes friends easily. He is someone's dad, someone's now ex-husband, someone's son and brother and uncle. Until all this came out, he wore a jacket and tie each day to his job with a nationally known firm. The victim's parents had no qualms about letting their children sleep over their aunt and uncle's house for a few days to play with their cousins. So it's not a matter of "this could never happen to MY kids."

I have no problems with adults doing as they please-- tattoos, piercings, whatever. It's not my taste, but I don't see it as a reason to prejudge anyone. And I had never heard the term "tramp stamp" until I read it on this thread, and can't see myself ever using it.

But I think these parents have unwittingly broken a barrier that their daughter still needs to keep her safe.

 

[Wendy5055]

Firstly, I want to apologize for even introducing the term "tramp stamp" which backside tattoos are referred to as being where I live. I did not intend for ANY child to be referred to as a "tramp". That is highly inappropriate and certainly was not my intention by stating what those tattoos are called in my town/state.

Let me be clear. I will not willingly consent to my daughter getting a real tattoo (nor do I have them, but her boy cousins and uncles do) on her person (among a host of other activities). When she is 18 it then becomes her choice, same as drinking, drugs, and other unacceptable behaviors that I do not condone. I can only try to instill in her what I feel are proper healthy boundaries for her to grow and be successful in her own way.

I do not feel that a child's clothing, skin, haircolor, or economical status make them any more of a target for predators. It does not matter who they are or what they look like...all children are targets. I feel most parents do what they feel is necessary for the protection of their own child.

I do have to say that modesty is a learned trait in some children (like my dd6). I am currently teaching my child that when wearing dresses she must sit properly (legs together)...there are reasons for this which could affect the treatment of her in her later years. I also teach her to keep her body clean, dressed and her hair combed...also for reasons that could affect her in later years.

The child showing the tattoo by lowering her pants is not intending to be inappropriate at all. She is just doing what she knows and is only a child. All I can say is that I should never be witness to my child pulling her pants down in public (for teachers or any other reason)!!!

Just everyone watch...I will have the rebellious teen with green hair all black clothes, piercings on every available surface WITH tattoos!!!!!!!!! I know fate can be fickle...{{{sigh}}}

 

[graygables]

I do not feel that a child's clothing... make them any more of a target for predators. It does not matter who they are or what they look like...all children are targets. I feel most parents do what they feel is necessary for the protection of their own child.

As someone who was married to a pedophile and had a daughter molested by him (his bio child), CLOTHING DOES MATTER. Immodest clothing attracts the attention of a pedophile faster than modest clothing does. If he has a chance to see a 9yo in a thong, that is more immediately gratifying than full-coverage panties. Bikini swimsuits are more attention-getting than one piece, micro shorts more than bermudas.

I think of the line from Lord of the Rings where Aragorn asks Frodo, "Are you frightened?" to which Frodo responds, "yes" and Aragorn says, "not nearly frightened enough. I know what hunts you."

That is not to say that parents need to be paranoid, but parents do need to WAKE UP. Books ARE judged by their covers, whether it's right or wrong, whether you like it or not, that's the way it is. Rather than stamp your (general you) foot and insist that you don't care what anyone thinks of you or your little darling, you need to consider what is "hunting" them (and they ARE) and minimize the chances that a child can come to harm as much as possible, which includes modest clothing and NO hint of adult sexualization. It's been mentioned several times on this thread, it's the adults who make it trampy/trashy/sexy and that is correct. The little girl doesn't understand those concepts, but she will all too soon if an adult is allowed to perceive her behavior as sexualized.

 

[The Moonk's Mom]

As someone who was married to a pedophile and had a daughter molested by him (his bio child), CLOTHING DOES MATTER. Immodest clothing attracts the attention of a pedophile faster than modest clothing does. If he has a chance to see a 9yo in a thong, that is more immediately gratifying than full-coverage panties. Bikini swimsuits are more attention-getting than one piece, micro shorts more than bermudas.

I think of the line from Lord of the Rings where Aragorn asks Frodo, "Are you frightened?" to which Frodo responds, "yes" and Aragorn says, "not nearly frightened enough. I know what hunts you."

That is not to say that parents need to be paranoid, but parents do need to WAKE UP. Books ARE judged by their covers, whether it's right or wrong, whether you like it or not, that's the way it is. Rather than stamp your (general you) foot and insist that you don't care what anyone thinks of you or your little darling, you need to consider what is "hunting" them (and they ARE) and minimize the chances that a child can come to harm as much as possible, which includes modest clothing and NO hint of adult sexualization. It's been mentioned several times on this thread, it's the adults who make it trampy/trashy/sexy and that is correct. The little girl doesn't understand those concepts, but she will all too soon if an adult is allowed to perceive her behavior as sexualized.

Well said! And I am sorry for your ordeal...

 

[JeremyGNJ]

A tramp stamp on a 5 yo?

hahaha that's exactly what I was going to say! It's just not right. (however I hope to see some on mommies at Disney World)

 

[JeremyGNJ]

Whoa, sorry I replied to somethign on page one...i didnt realize this was an old thread.