Tattoo Magazines: Pick a Cover Almost Any Cover! What Will You See?

I'm a fan of tattoo art and whenever I happen to be in a bookstore I always stop to gander at the tattoo magazines. I am always met with the image of a woman, never a male. Does this strike anyone as interesting? I am not craving male models, however, it frustrates me to see that the women on the outside and inside of tattoo mags are women who are usually scantily clad. Every now and then I'll see a tattoo mag where a woman is posing simply and her tattoos do the talking. But mostly I see women holding their breasts, or wearing lingerie, wearing a tee shirt that is cut off just above the nipples and so many more photos that are meant to be alluring in some way.

I miss the days when more often than not tattoo mags featured women and men showing off the art work they enjoy without the sexual content. More and more tattoo mags are turning into Maxim magazine but with tattoos. They are becoming a "men's interest magazine." Where did this idea come about? Perhaps because right off the bat women and men are revealing a good portion of their bodies to display their ink and someone decided to take it to "the next level."

Again, I am not wishing for male models to show up wearing less clothes, but I can't help but notice that the men in the magazines are not posing in the sexually suggestive ways that the women are.

My feelings about how women are often portrayed in tattoo magazines are the same as how I feel about other forms of pornography. Some may feel that tattoo models are an alternate to traditional pinup models just as some believe that Suicide Girls models are a healthy alternative to mainstream porn. I see no improvement simply because women sport tattoos and piercings and are larger or thinner than the average Playboy model.

I've heard the argument that offering up a wider variety of sexual images is healthy. Diversity is great but pornography is still pornography.

I brought up this issue with a few acquaintances of mine and here I will address some of the arguments that came forth. As you read this post perhaps you will come across disagreements you have had with others whether you are in the pro-porn or anti-porn camp.

Conversation PART 1:  One of my acquaintances presented an idea that I am all too familiar with. This person told me that anyone who opposes pornography or criticizes it, is someone who wants to stifle one's expression of sexuality and most likely has hang ups about sex. Furthermore this individual stated that opposing to any kind of pornography is an example of body hating.

Going against the grain of pornography does not equate to body hating or having some kind of hang up. I often find those who use the term "hang up" to be quite condescending in their analysis.I am in not way suggesting that the answer to eliminating objectification is de-sexualization. It seems that in our distorted culture there is this resistance to exploring anything that isn't overt and exploitative as if what we will be left with is nothingness. If we remove objectifying sex images no doubt there will be countless men and yes, women who will be disappointed and will feel gypped. But that speaks to the power of patriarchy. These images have been around for so long and have become more and more extreme throughout each decade. Degradation is not our only option however, it is often what people seek and are happy to receive.

Men have and have had the power to impose how women should present themselves. To deny this is to reinforce the spinning wheel of patriarchy. For those who eagerly look forward to pornographic images, paying attention to the harms of it is that last thing anyone want to do. It's easier to ridicule feminists and to call us "feminazis" so that we don't ruin someone's buzz. Patriarchy is "normal" in our society because we have had nothing else. Many have no interest in battling against it because partriarchy benefits them.

If more people were to understand the harms of pornography the sex industry would take an economic dive. Not only do corporate industries want to keep you interested in porn for the sake of their businesses but those who thoroughly enjoy porn do not want their pastime taken away from them.

I should mention that I am not in favor of shutting down the sex industry. Taking away strip clubs, porno mags, videos, etc. will not change one's desire for pornography. If a person is going to change or alter their views in anyway it is important that they do it willingly. Censorship is not the answer.

If you haven't noticed already, I am largely speaking about heterosexual mainstream porn. And yes, tattoo magazines largely fit into that category. I have never seen a tattoo magazine that caters to the LGBTQI community. After all under the umbrella of patriarchy is also a heterosexist culture. But whether a magazine and other forms of pornography are geared towards straight men and women or other sexual orientations, porn still serves the same purpose. It is not only about "getting off."

In many ways porn offers men a sense of control and also presents a woman who is seemingly always willing.

In adult videos for example, men are able to take control over the women as they can pause the video, rewind, fast forward, and watch a women praise a man for his prowess.

The media bombards us with images of women in revealing clothing and sultry facial expressions which also promotes the idea that whenever a woman dresses up or presents herself as "sexy", she is doing so for the sake of men.

Conversation PART 2: During the conversation on this topic another acquaintance of mine chimed in and stated that it seems that I have been making the blanket statement that pornography is "bad." Also, that it seems I am anti-sex and most people think porn is enjoyable.

I agree that the vast majority of people find pornography to be satisfying. There are a number of reasons as to why people enjoy porn, and I don't think that simply because so many enjoy it, that automatically makes viewing or participating in porn a healthy practice.

Also, I do think porn is indeed "bad." Perhaps stating that porn is "bad" is not the most eloquent or articulate way of putting it but it is accurate. I think so many of us liberal folks want to stay away from words like "bad" or "wrong" because it seems narrow minded. But the truth of the matter is that belonging to the left side of politics does not mean that one has to accept anything that comes our way. Being "open minded" does not translate into the belief that there are no absolutes.

Heterosexual porn caters to men and their supposed desires. Porn tells men what they desire or should desire and it also tells women what they desire and should desire. Usually porn sends the message that men are to present themselves as dominant and women are supposed to be submissive. Not only are women supposed to be submissive but they are supposed to LOVE being submissive and CRAVE it as well. This makes the dominating man feel all the more powerful. Women are thought of as playthings while men are thought of as heroes. Heroes in which other like minded men can aspire to be.

Being that porn is mainstream and enjoyed by most, doesn't mean that those who oppose it are anti-sex. I find this to be a very conservative view. This is a common argument and a very ignorant one. Ignorant as in "without knowledge" not "a stupid idiot." Heh.

To say that I am anti-sex simply because I dislike pornography suggests that pornography is what sex is and should be. That desiring and admiring pornography is the only way to go. 

I am a person who celebrates sexuality but pornography tells me that in order to feel liberated, in order to feel free, I am to carry on the job assigned to me by our sexist culture which is to proceed with the idea that a man knows what margins I should fall into.
.
Although women are not responsible for the way men choose to respond to the female sex it is counterproductive to involve oneself in an arena that perpetuates sexism. So, although a tattoo magazine may not say "Maxim" or "Playboy" on the cover the idea is pretty similar regardless as to whether the featured women are completely naked or not.

The willing women who participate in posing for tattoo magazines and other revealing magazines might want to think about how they are being presented. Maybe it's a nice gig for someone who is trying to break into the modeling business, or someone who is seeking money or attention, or someone who figures taking their clothes off is a nice way to feel liberated and to have other men tell them how great they look. The thing is, the men who view these women are most likely not thinking about how the woman in a thong is supposedly freeing herself and liberating herself.

Patriarchy has such an influence that our society has come up with the common phrase, "boys will be boys." You may have heard the common excuse, "what do you expect I'm a guy!" As if being a guy means that men cannot help themselves.

I don't think we need a pushed version of sex appeal in the media. But can you imagine a world without? What WOULD we be left with? As I mentioned earlier we wouldn't be left with a sexless society although I assume a great number would feel that they were left hanging and that something is missing.

So, what is more appealing to you? Would you prefer to see a near naked woman on a tattoo cover or could you be happy to admire her beauty and her natural sex appeal without the lack of clothing? A woman happily posing without her breasts and butt revealed. Would it really be so tragic? If your answer is "yes", then I would kindly encourage you to take a few minutes to think about why.