Body Art

[KenTankerous]

If a freshman basketball star showed up at his or her first game wearing a $5000 suit or $10,000 Rolex, wouldn't some one be asking about the origin of those gifts? Yet, ESPN leads with the kids from UCLA and Georgetown each sporting at least $2000 worth of ink and we just blow it off?

Maybe it's the nature of the tattoo as "art" we don't appreciate in privileged society? Maybe it's that we look past them because we do not want to judge? But whatever it is, these kids are flashing thousands of dollars in work they got for free or paid for somehow and, just like a Rolex, ought to be investigated.

Am I wrong?

[sporthenry]

If a freshman basketball star showed up at his or her first game wearing a $5000 suit or $10,000 Rolex, wouldn't some one be asking about the origin of those gifts? Yet, ESPN leads with the kids from UCLA and Georgetown each sporting at least $2000 worth of ink and we just blow it off?

Maybe it's the nature of the tattoo as "art" we don't appreciate in privileged society? Maybe it's that we look past them because we do not want to judge? But whatever it is, these kids are flashing thousands of dollars in work they got for free or paid for somehow and, just like a Rolex, ought to be investigated.

Am I wrong?

I agree, I think the thing is the people who would be concerned with it (i.e. the NCAA) don't realize the cost of tattoos but realize the cost of suits and a Rolex because that is the culture they are from. I never realized the cost of putting color in a tattoo and since then I always have wondered where anyone got the money for the color tats or the complete body art.

[Newton_14]

If a freshman basketball star showed up at his or her first game wearing a $5000 suit or $10,000 Rolex, wouldn't some one be asking about the origin of those gifts? Yet, ESPN leads with the kids from UCLA and Georgetown each sporting at least $2000 worth of ink and we just blow it off?

Maybe it's the nature of the tattoo as "art" we don't appreciate in privileged society? Maybe it's that we look past them because we do not want to judge? But whatever it is, these kids are flashing thousands of dollars in work they got for free or paid for somehow and, just like a Rolex, ought to be investigated.

Am I wrong?

I think it is certainly fair to ask the question on where the funds came from, as a gift is a gift. With the Ohio St scandal, you would think it would get more attention. Not surpirsed at ESPN though. There is a reason Pat Forde left there, and it wasn't money....

[phaedrus]

If a freshman basketball star showed up at his or her first game wearing a $5000 suit or $10,000 Rolex, wouldn't some one be asking about the origin of those gifts? Yet, ESPN leads with the kids from UCLA and Georgetown each sporting at least $2000 worth of ink and we just blow it off?

Maybe it's the nature of the tattoo as "art" we don't appreciate in privileged society? Maybe it's that we look past them because we do not want to judge? But whatever it is, these kids are flashing thousands of dollars in work they got for free or paid for somehow and, just like a Rolex, ought to be investigated.

Am I wrong?

Yes, you're wrong. It's utterly uninteresting that an 18-year old has managed to spend $2000. I had way more than $2000 worth of "things" when I entered college.

[hudlow]

Paraphrasing a quote often attributed to George Carlin....

$2000 worth of tattoos is God's way of telling you that you have too much money....

[devil84]

Yes, you're wrong. It's utterly uninteresting that an 18-year old has managed to spend $2000. I had way more than $2000 worth of "things" when I entered college.

I did, too (accounting for changes in the worth of a dollar since then). My kids in college/grad school do, too. But I'm guessing that those athletes with $2K in tattoos also have the computer, iPhones, iPads, iPods, iWhatevers, fancy headphones (they all seem to have them getting off the buses), and other "things" similar to most college students. While my kids aren't the type that would want a tattoo even if they could afford it, they would find ways of "blowing" the money on stuff that keeps them happy and may raise some eyebrows (as in, "you paid how much for that?!").

I think the difference is that the average college student doesn't have $2K to drop on tattoos, because the bulk of the discretionary spending money has gone towards the computer, cell phone, iWhatevers, and the other "stuff." I know a few college kids who eked out some substantial savings for a very small tattoo, leaving their Facebook friends shaking their heads wondering how they had the money to spend on something that was clearly discretionary -- at least clothes, cell phones, tablet computers, and headphones are useful or aid productivity, even if they're a bit fancier than "needed."

I had no idea how expensive tattoos were, until I was with a group of parents when one high school youngster came up to proudly show us her new tattoo. After she left, the other parents were terribly concerned with how she could afford it, as her family was struggling financially and the girl was going to marry a guy with no job prospects for either of them, neither going on to college. Until then, I had NO idea that tattoos were that pricey (I also learned the definition of a "tramp stamp" at the same time). I don't understand how the average person affords one, let alone the body art on some of these college ball players.