tribal tats belonged to dropout hippies before they belonged to frat boys. at least in sf. real hippies, not the ones who think they're gonna save the world. true story, bro. and a sad one.

Looks a hell of a lot better than the tribal I saw being plastered on my friends arm. It was a home tattoo nightmare a couple years back as I looked on in disbelief. I took a pic of it, since it was bad enough for me to actually want to take a picture of it. Yours looks like it could be worked on to make it into something else. My friend's tatt has really thick black barbs that would be next to impossible to work with. I mean so thick you can't tell that it's a tribal at some angles. Your's are relatively thin, and can be used to weave other images into a new piece, if you ever decided to go in that direction.

Seriously FD, it could be a lot worse.

I guess I should hold off on announcing my Tom Waits tattoo that covers the entirety of my back.

Since it was my post that started all this, that means these are my sheep. Their wool shall keep me warm in the winter and wealthy in the summer.

tribal tats belonged to primitive tribes before they belonged to drugged out hippy losers or pussy chasing frat boys. true story bro

yeah.... i guess the point i was making is that they didn't always have the negative connotations they do now. although i guess it's still kind of lame appropriation for both hippies and frat boys.

Is it really that bad? I always thought they were kind of tacky, but I never judged/stereotyped someone who had one.

No.

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/i...EbnqetzZuzugT8

I've seen some face tats that are pretty cool. That is not one of them.

Tribal tats are basically trampstamps for bros. I guess some of them are cool, depending on the design. But they mostly look generic, cliche, and tasteless. Imo.

Do you feel the same way about the millions of people with tattoos they picked from their shop's generic tattoo book? or crosses, child portraits, and all the other popular things people get tattooed?