Search Results
6/19/2025, 7:24:27 PM
>>33243985
They absolutely are not.
>>33243986
I think you've misunderstood me a little. My point isn't that you can't judge a book by its cover, my point is simply that "having tattoos" covers such a broad range of people that the information it gives you is meaningless. UNLESS, of course, you're the sort of person who's perfectly happy deleting the majority of people from their lives. i.e. a deranged shut in who doesn't interact with actual real people on the street.
Lots and lots of religious people have tattoos. Lots of conservative people have tattoos. If we're talking about the STYLE of tattoo then yes, that tells you a lot, but that's not what we're talking about.
They absolutely are not.
>>33243986
I think you've misunderstood me a little. My point isn't that you can't judge a book by its cover, my point is simply that "having tattoos" covers such a broad range of people that the information it gives you is meaningless. UNLESS, of course, you're the sort of person who's perfectly happy deleting the majority of people from their lives. i.e. a deranged shut in who doesn't interact with actual real people on the street.
Lots and lots of religious people have tattoos. Lots of conservative people have tattoos. If we're talking about the STYLE of tattoo then yes, that tells you a lot, but that's not what we're talking about.
Page 1