I’ve joked here before about getting a tattoo as a sign of teenage rebellion, because, well, that’s what happens, isn’t it? Getting a tattoo is obviously a sign of defiance and corruption and bad character – adults warn that it’ll ruin your chances for getting a job, or mark you as untrustworthy.

Really, a little bit of ink can do all that? How innovative.

Of course, it’s more to do with people’s perceptions of the world than anything else, which is … interesting. Tattoos have meant a lot of different things to a lot of different cultures for as long as people have had access to inks and needly things. They’ve been widespread in the Pacific for thousands of years, as far as we can tell, and been large facets of cultures from Asia, Australia, the Americas and Africa as well.

Tattoos weren’t hugely widespread in European culture up until the voyages of Captain Cook, but they did exist. Sailors, in particular, were known for tattoos. Cook and the stories and examples he brought back simply helped spur a revival among the wider population, but tattooing was largely considered the provenance of criminals and renegades on the fringes of polite society.

In the later 19th century, tattoos became something of a status symbol among the upper classes in Europe, being expensive and painful to obtain. America followed a similar trend, but the Civil War marked the beginning of another tradition – tattoos worn by soldiers and other servicemen.

Of course, tattoos as a status symbol only lasted until the invention of the electric tattoo machine around the time of WWI. Once they could be readily and easily obtained, they went back to being marks of low character, the rebellious, and criminals.

I’d say that says something, except I’m a little too irritated to pick apart exactly what.

It isn’t that I particularly want a tattoo – I can’t think of anything I especially want on my body permanently. I rather admire the conviction of people who can and do. I’ve seen tattoos called everything from art that people permanently wear to disgusting – I’ve also heard and seen more commonly defined “art” called disgusting, but that’s absolutely something that would take too long to get into – to a higher form of self-expression.

The stigma against tattoos, especially considering their association with the youth, raises an interesting question – if so many of the “deplorable youth” are getting tattoos and growing up, will they at some point decide that obviously the design that meant something to them when they were younger is heinous and shameful? Will they be forced to fire themselves, or anyone who comes in wearing one? Or will society’s attitude once again shift to accommodate the people largely responsible for influencing that attitude?

I can quite honestly say that I have no idea. I suppose if that does happen, society will just have to pick something else to demonize as a sign of the moral corruption of the youth.

— Nina Collay is a junior at Thornton Academy who can frequently be found listening to music, reading, wrestling with a heavy cello case, or poking at the keyboard of an uncooperative laptop.