It's hard to imagine literally branding another human being and thinking that is ok but that is exactly what happened when this riled client made an unfortunate choice in a tattoo artist.
This story was posted to Reddit's r/AmItheAsshole subreddit by u/TattoodNoobAITA (OP), the tattooed individual in question.
The tattoo was to be a sentimental 'heirloom' type of piece as it was a tattoo that had been received by three generations of the men in OP's family. So it was essential that the piece look exactly like the others. OP brought a photo with him when he went to get it done, it was not to be an original or derivative work.
That's important here because the only supporting argument that could be made for the artist's actions that followed would be that she was an artist who wanted to sign her work. That, in and of itself, is an argument that a good number of us could understand. It is only natural for an artist to want to claim credit for their creation.
But there is a line here. The sheer number of tattoo artists who responded in the comments support this. It is never ok to leave your mark on another human being (without their consent). This is, apparently, a code within the tattoo artist community.
The other problem with this is that it wasn't even an original piece and it was important that it be identical to his ancestor's. So why sign it at all?
The simple fact of the matter is that branding another human being is a bit twisted and gets worse the more you think about it.
The artist takes the L here.
No comments:
Post a Comment