A long time ago...

August 10, 2005 10:04 AM

For all you cutters - Scar Wars. If you think that ink is too dirty and want to go au natural.
posted by guruguy9 (296 comments total)

beautiful. but owwwww....
posted by gnutron at 10:08 AM on August 10, 2005

Holy Shit.
I have ink [not a lot, but I want more] but this is out of my league. the pic on the far left threw me. That's a lot of skin missing.

ouch.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:08 AM on August 10, 2005

far right. oops.
posted by exlotuseater at 10:08 AM on August 10, 2005

GROSS. Gross, gross, gross. My skin is crawling.
posted by WaterSprite at 10:11 AM on August 10, 2005

Hello tetanus!
posted by fungible at 10:13 AM on August 10, 2005

WARNING: May be trigger material for people with SI problems. Maybe that warning should be on the front page.
posted by jammer at 10:13 AM on August 10, 2005

I think the one on the right is a poorly-formed Skinny Puppy logo.
posted by Jairus at 10:14 AM on August 10, 2005

Links are for suckers.
posted by Jairus at 10:14 AM on August 10, 2005

So, what's the draw here? More hardcore than using ink? Or are these folks addicted to the body's natural painkillers so they intentionally inflict pain upon themselves?

There are things I could just as happily know nothing about, this is definitely one of them. I wish these people well but my gut reaction is that many of them need therapy.
posted by fenriq at 10:15 AM on August 10, 2005

This is so fake!
posted by jonson at 10:17 AM on August 10, 2005

jairus: I thought that too, at first, but I feel like it's something else- perhaps an obscure astrological or alchemical symbol?
posted by exlotuseater at 10:17 AM on August 10, 2005

Poor deluded jonson.
posted by Jairus at 10:18 AM on August 10, 2005

None of these float my boat, but scarification can be incredibly beautiful.
posted by o2b at 10:20 AM on August 10, 2005

I found the one on the right in this one to be the most wince-inducing.

Jairus : "I think the one on the right is a poorly-formed Skinny Puppy logo."

I thought so too for a sec, but the very different bottom shape makes me think it was just coincidence.
posted by Bugbread at 10:20 AM on August 10, 2005

A few of these look infected. Can't imagine it could be easy to avoid infection with that amount of skin missing over such a large area on some of these.

As someone with multiple tattoos and piercings, as well as someone who has dabbled in minor scarrification, may I just say.... ew.
posted by elf_baby at 10:20 AM on August 10, 2005

If I still had my IAM account, I'd message the artist to ask what exactly it's supposed to be. Perhaps someone who remembers their password can do so?
posted by Jairus at 10:22 AM on August 10, 2005

AIN IS FREEDOM
posted by fire&wings at 10:25 AM on August 10, 2005

The adjective ain has one meaning:

Meaning #1: belonging to or on behalf of a specified person (especially yourself); preceded by a possessive.

THE IRONING IS DELICIOUS
posted by Jairus at 10:29 AM on August 10, 2005

ain?
posted by jonson at 10:29 AM on August 10, 2005

And I love how the "AIN IS FREEDOM" is in that stupid font they use on all the goth websites.
posted by fungible at 10:33 AM on August 10, 2005

that's incredibly disgusting. i don't even know what to say about these people.
posted by jimmy at 10:33 AM on August 10, 2005

fire&wings : "AIN IS FREEDOM"

AIN IS FREED㊉M
posted by Bugbread at 10:36 AM on August 10, 2005

Touche, bugbread.
posted by Jairus at 10:38 AM on August 10, 2005

AIN IS FREED㊉M - that would make such a killer scar-too.
posted by guruguy9 at 10:39 AM on August 10, 2005

jimmy : "that's incredibly disgusting."

Keep in mind that, just as with tattoo photos, the picture is taken directly after the work is done, and does not reflect the final goal (no, people who get tattoos do not all have a penchant for red or pink fill work, that's due to skin irritation from the tattoing. When the tattoo heals, the inks stay but the red tinge goes away. In the same way, the scarring folks don't go for the "still bloody" look, that's just due to the fact that the photo was taken when the cutting was finished, not when the scarring itself finishes, which probably takes a matter of weeks or more).
posted by Bugbread at 10:39 AM on August 10, 2005

God.

Last month, I cut my hand up. Not badly, but it left this annoying scar that hasn't gone away yet. It itched like hell and looks like crap.

Why do people do this kind of thing on purpose? I mean, just, eww.
posted by wakko at 10:40 AM on August 10, 2005

i don't even know what to say about these people.

Well, whatever you do, don't make fun of them or mock them in any way.
posted by Necker at 10:41 AM on August 10, 2005

yeah, sorry bugbread, i guess i just freaked out right after i saw them. really, i guess it's not that much worse than tattooing oneself.
posted by jimmy at 10:41 AM on August 10, 2005

(er, and the reason, in case you don't know, is that the photos (both of cutting and of tattoing) are taken by the tattoist / cutter (whatever the actual term is) when they finish their work, as its their last chance before the customer walks out the door. I'm sure they'd prefer to have good photos of the final scars (and a few of the pictures do show the final scars, but not many), but it's hard to get customers to come back for just a photo)

Parentheses count increasing daily
posted by Bugbread at 10:42 AM on August 10, 2005

the photo was taken when the cutting was finished, not when the scarring itself finishes, which probably takes a matter of weeks or more

Skin removal scarification will be raw and sore for about six months, and will take up to a year or two to heal fully.
posted by Jairus at 10:43 AM on August 10, 2005

No need to apologize, jimmy. If the scarring work itself disgusts you, that's cool with me. I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page as far as what the photos actually represent.

(Note: personally, not disgusted, but find both tattoing and scarring extremely silly)
posted by Bugbread at 10:45 AM on August 10, 2005

Thanks Jairus.
posted by Bugbread at 10:45 AM on August 10, 2005

Jairus, I guess these folks don't go swimming in the ocean very often then, eh?
posted by fenriq at 10:46 AM on August 10, 2005

fenriq: That hurts just to think about.
posted by Jairus at 10:49 AM on August 10, 2005

Those people are so remarkably ill. I wish we lived under a dictator who would kill people who do shit like that to themselves.

Seriously, kill yourself, cutters-- you're just going to do that eventually anyway when all your skin is gone and you can't get people to gawk anymore.
posted by Mayor Curley at 11:01 AM on August 10, 2005

I wish we lived under a dictator who would kill people who do shit like that to themselves.

You are so understanding and accepting of others, even those whom you perceive as flawed. It is a sign of your remarkable intelligence. I am humbled in your presence. Your live and let live attitute should serve as an inspiration to us all, as it is truly representative of what America is all about.
posted by mr.curmudgeon at 11:15 AM on August 10, 2005

As an side, Mayor Curley is the most uninteresting troll I've ever seen.
posted by Jairus at 11:16 AM on August 10, 2005

Working really hard there to show you're just as crazy as them, eh, Mayor Curley?
posted by Bugbread at 11:16 AM on August 10, 2005

I have several tattoos, and I never quite got the whole scarification thing. It looks kind of cool on people who get keloid scars, but on pasty white people, it's just ugly, and less precise and detailed than what you can do with ink anyway.

But I don't think this is particularly related to "cutting". From what I've seen, the people who do that are into the process, not the results. This would be way too long-term and low-payoff for them, I think.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 11:17 AM on August 10, 2005

SSSSSSSSSS!!!!
(sound made with a grimace, exposing teeth, and sucking in lightly)

YOWWW!!!

Guys, go ahead and do all the fucked up shit that you want. But girls. You beautiful, lovely girls of the world. PLEEEAAASSE stop it! That pretty little girl with the big bonsai tree cut into her (on the left). WTF!?!? Don't do that!! You have not been made prettier!

Go smash flowers, set puppies on fire, and gut sparrows while you're at it. Why do people have to ruin beautiful things?
posted by redteam at 11:19 AM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley *is* a scar. That's irony for you!
posted by mr.curmudgeon at 11:20 AM on August 10, 2005

Guys, go ahead and do all the fucked up shit that you want. But girls. You beautiful, lovely girls of the world. PLEEEAAASSE stop it! That pretty little girl with the big bonsai tree cut into her (on the left). WTF!?!? Don't do that!! You have not been made prettier!

yes, all your bods are belong to us.

(are you like the same kind of guy who walks past strange women and says, "smile," like some kind of command? cuz it's about as patronizing.)
posted by RedEmma at 11:31 AM on August 10, 2005

George Lucas has really gone too far with the licensing this time.
posted by brain_drain at 11:33 AM on August 10, 2005

My wife did one with white ink. Once it faded a bit the image was so subtle that maybe people think it's scarification.
posted by Rusty Iron at 11:34 AM on August 10, 2005

I agree that Mayor Curley is being the Bill O-Reilly of Metafilter.. but I see how some of these can be kind of cool.. I have a bunch of friends that have brands.. I've contemplated getting one myself..

But like redteam said, girls shouldn't scar/modify (normal piercings aside) themselves.. that's my personal preference in a girl, but I think girls are so much prettier lookin' without the mutilation.
posted by pez_LPhiE at 11:38 AM on August 10, 2005

Hmm, I'd just like to give these people a good scrubbing with a loofah and extra-strong exfoliating gel. With menthol extract. And then rub them in chili pepper. And, grand final, pour oxygenated water all over the scars. *evil laugh*

Just to contribute to their pain-is-freedom experience.

Nah, not really. I think it's insane and makes you look like an idiot, but, they're not hurting anybody else, so, why not. There's more stupid ways of hurting yourself than this.
posted by funambulist at 11:39 AM on August 10, 2005

Is the one in the middle here supposed to be... a crop circle? or is it actually a symbol representing something?
posted by funambulist at 11:45 AM on August 10, 2005

The one on the far right (on the "au natural" link) is, I believe, a Pink Floyd logo.
posted by Steve Simpson at 11:48 AM on August 10, 2005

Scarification: Ancient Body Art Leaving New Marks

Australian Museum Online

Some traditional African scarification

Some quick googling for other information.
posted by sciurus at 11:54 AM on August 10, 2005

But like redteam said, girls shouldn't scar/modify (normal piercings aside) themselves.. that's my personal preference in a girl, but I think girls are so much prettier lookin' without the mutilation.

Why the fuck not? Women can do whatever fucked up body thing to themselves they want. Your second sentence I'm cool with, since you say it's a preference, but I see no reason why women shouldn't scar/modify their bodies if they want to.
posted by agregoli at 11:58 AM on August 10, 2005

Good eye, Simpson.
posted by Jairus at 12:00 PM on August 10, 2005

I actually think some of these are quite striking and as someone with tattoos I don't have any room to talk badly about someone who wants to modify their body.

But Lord! Those pictures! I felt like passing out for a minute there. I can take tubgirl and goatse and knifebutt without batting an eye but missing skin I cannot handle.
posted by LeeJay at 12:01 PM on August 10, 2005

funambulist : "Just to contribute to their pain-is-freedom experience."

Nonono, PAIN isn't freedom! PAIN sucks! AIN is freedom!!
posted by Bugbread at 12:05 PM on August 10, 2005

1. These are amazing.

2. I would never do this.

3. That really, really looks like it hurts.

4. If you want to do this to yourself, more power to you.
posted by ColdChef at 12:06 PM on August 10, 2005

Many, many more pictures from scarwars
(disclaimer: link to my site)
posted by glider at 12:13 PM on August 10, 2005

Shannon!

It is a small internet.
posted by Jairus at 12:17 PM on August 10, 2005

You are so understanding and accepting of others, even those whom you perceive as flawed. It is a sign of your remarkable intelligence.

So tolerance of mentally ill people publicly disfiguring themselves is a sign of intelligence because you deem it to be? You're the dictator I've been looking for.
posted by Mayor Curley at 12:21 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley : "So tolerance of mentally ill people publicly disfiguring themselves is a sign of intelligence because you deem it to be?"

No. But intolerance of non-mentally ill people publicly disfiguring themselves is a possible indicator of lack of intelligence. (Not necessarily evidence of lack of intelligence, more like a warning sign, in the "if 4 or more of the following apply to you, you might not be intelligent" way)
posted by Bugbread at 12:25 PM on August 10, 2005

"You ain't a Cutter, I'm a Cutter."

Breaking Away
posted by fixedgear at 12:25 PM on August 10, 2005

No. But intolerance of non-mentally ill people publicly disfiguring themselves is a possible indicator of lack of intelligence.

Reasoning, please. Other than a decree that it's so because you're fine with the behavior.
posted by Mayor Curley at 12:29 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread: eh, I wonder where the P ended up? on her neck in full view unless she wears a scarf all the time?
posted by funambulist at 12:32 PM on August 10, 2005

Most of those shots are really gorgeous. Some of them are kind of "meh" as far as line control and art go.

Almost all of them put me off my lunch a bit - either in sheer intensity or simply in the gore factor. I love the designs, but the freshly cut stuff is kind of hard to look at.

And I'm not a stranger to body mods. If it makes me take a step back and go "Woah." just looking at it in a jpeg I can't imagine what it must be like for the unintiated or averse. A few of my friends have so much metal in they set off metal detectors at airports, and have been doing this since the 80s. And yet, I'm practically still a virgin. And still probably weirder than most of them.

However, it's been really, really tempting to get a small hybrid scar/brand/tattoo piece of my own design. I can think of some really interesting designs and methods you could combine with all three techniques. I'm just not static nor committed enough to find a single piece of art or symbology I'd like on me, except for perhaps a chao-ordo star/sigil of my own graphical design. But I'm a total stickler for artistic reproduction and detail. I'm not going to be able to take a laser print of my art down to the local joe-tattoo and cheap jewelry joint and get the work done I'd want to get done. Also, I feel somehow that this choice might be something of a cop out, claiming "no direction" or "all directions at any time" as my personal symbology. Maybe I might as well get an anarchy symbol tattooed on my forehead or something. Or not.

Heh, spellcheck for chao-ordo = hoodoo! Who do? You do!
posted by loquacious at 12:36 PM on August 10, 2005

Woah. It is a small internet. Hi. Pardon the monkeys, but I'm pretty sure you're nonplussed. Thanks for some of the most intense pics I've ever seen anywhere.
posted by loquacious at 12:38 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley : "Reasoning, please."

Purely anecdotal: Of the unintelligent and intelligent people I've known, the unintelligent had a higher likelihood of being intolerant of non-mentally ill people disfiguring themselves publicly than the intelligent folks did. Until there are some hard statistics to go on, unfortunately, I can only really rely on my own anecdotal knowledge.
posted by Bugbread at 12:42 PM on August 10, 2005

loquacious, yeah, I'm pretty used to monkeys by now!
posted by glider at 12:44 PM on August 10, 2005

non-mentally ill people disfiguring themselves

You've already established that you think this is healthy, normal behavior that you would be comfortable seeing in a school teacher, doctor or airline pilot. In fact, you're probably about to argue (based on irrefutable anecdotal evidence) that people who chop themselves up and use it to seek attention are saner than people who don't.
posted by Mayor Curley at 12:49 PM on August 10, 2005

"[I] intolerance of non-mentally ill people publicly disfiguring themselves is a possible indicator of lack of intelligence."

Are you sure those people are not mentally ill? I'd call masochism "unhealthy", anyway.

They're not in DR Congo or someplace where scarification is a cultural thing that's been going for centuries (and I've never seen a photo of an African tribal marking anywhere near as extensive and detailed as these anyway); they're middle-class young white people, probably raised in the suburbs (as, at least in America, most middle-class white people are), doing something "hip", "now" and "with-it" -- that involves cutting lots of skin. (Why not "artistically" remove your nose, lips and eyelids too?)

I myself can't wait for a making-big-dents-in-head-with-hammers fad to catch on, which will no doubt spawn even sillier defenses of their "right to self-expression".
posted by davy at 12:52 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley: Interestingly enough, I happen to know a school teacher, a doctor, and an airline pilot who participate in some pretty heavy body modification. I'm pretty sure they all have scarification or branding of some kind.

Care to explain why that should make me less comfortable?
posted by Jairus at 12:53 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley : "You've already established that you think this is healthy, normal behavior that you would be comfortable seeing in a school teacher, doctor or airline pilot."

I have? When?

Mayor Curley : "In fact, you're probably about to argue (based on irrefutable anecdotal evidence) that people who chop themselves up and use it to seek attention are saner than people who don't."

I guess we disagree on statistical analysis. Not only am I not going to argue that, but I find the likelihood of me ever arguing something like that really improbable, not probable.
posted by Bugbread at 12:54 PM on August 10, 2005

I love it when MeFi gets all smalltown, ha ha.
Whatever you do, don't click here [NSFW]...
posted by glider at 12:54 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley: Quit trolling pls kthx.
posted by wakko at 12:56 PM on August 10, 2005

Interestingly enough, I happen to know a school teacher, a doctor, and an airline pilot who participate in some pretty heavy body modification.

Of course you do. It's the Internet. And I'll bet that you're a prominent lawyer who has his tongue split and a tribal tattoo on his face. Because that would help your argument and you can't be pressed for evidence.
posted by Mayor Curley at 12:58 PM on August 10, 2005

davy : "Are you sure those people are not mentally ill? I'd call masochism 'unhealthy', anyway.

Agreed.

davy : "I myself can't wait for a making-big-dents-in-head-with-hammers fad to catch on, which will no doubt spawn even sillier defenses of their 'right to self-expression'."

I dunno that any additional defense of the "right to self-expression" is needed. "You can do whatever the hell you want to your own body (as long as you are not pregnant)" doesn't really need to be custom tailored to individual cases. My defense of why people should be allowed to pierce their ears is the same as my defense of why they should be able to pierce their tongues, which is the same as why they should be able to pierce their eyeballs, which is why they should be able to pierce their brains. I don't think I need to come up with new, sillier defenses for individual cases.
posted by Bugbread at 12:59 PM on August 10, 2005

So, MC, what you're arguing is that centuries and eons of arguably well-balanced primitive and/or tribal cultures all around the globe are all mentally ill? Even the non-bloodthirsty cultures known more for living in balance with the natural world around them?

Sure, there's mentally ill people that modify themselves for arguably the wrong reasons. There's even mentally ill people who modify themselves for arguably the "right" reasons.

But there's even plenty of mentally ill people who are obsessed with baseball, or freight trains, cans of spam, or even children's toys.

So, Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot. Over?

(And body modification/scarification/tatooing isn't just an African or darkie thing. Check out the Celts. Check out Polynesians. Asiatic cultures do it too. Native Americans. It's pretty much universally global. It's not something new. It's a revival. And arguing that just because someone wants to ink, cut, implant or pierce themselves doesn't mean that they also will eventually whack themselves in the head with a hammer or cut off parts of their face. That's just fucking ridiculous, wrongheaded, and illogic.)

Also: MetaFilter: Parentheses count increasing daily!
posted by loquacious at 1:00 PM on August 10, 2005

A tattooed lawyer you say?
posted by glider at 1:00 PM on August 10, 2005

Of course you do. It's the Internet. And I'll bet that you're a prominent lawyer who has his tongue split and a tribal tattoo on his face. Because that would help your argument and you can't be pressed for evidence.

I've never seen so many strawmen in one post before.
posted by Jairus at 1:03 PM on August 10, 2005

I wonder if any of these people know ahead of time whether they have the genetic tendency for keloid scarring or hypertrophic scarring? If so, they're going to be in for a nasty surprise when their "art" doesn't just heal, but continues to grow and grow and turn into a massive puffy rope-like sprawl of pink collagen fiber, possibly restricting their movement, with no really effective cure or treatment known. (Depite what some doctors will tell you, excision/recision, laser treatements, cortisone injections, Mederma, and plastic sheeting do very little to make them shrink. Trust me on this.)

But hey, let the idiots choose to suffer for their "art". By their standards, I've got a bitchin' stomach (from childhood surgery) and my sister's got a totally wild arm and back (from mole removals). Woo hoo, our family is hardcore!
posted by Asparagirl at 1:04 PM on August 10, 2005

I think I'll stick with just photoshoping my scars...
posted by PurplePorpoise at 1:06 PM on August 10, 2005

"Interestingly enough, I happen to know a school teacher, a doctor, and an airline pilot who participate in some pretty heavy body modification. I'm pretty sure they all have scarification or branding of some kind.

Care to explain why that should make me less comfortable?"

Presumably a doctor would be able to control infection, and at least after it heals and stops hurting a pilot could fly okay, but I'm sure I don't want people who do that in a position of authority and/or example over my niece.

And loquacious, I don't mean that these cut-up individuals will go on to chop off their lips or dent their heads, I mean that these kinds of fads get weirder, more extreme, and more damaging all the time. Maybe the graduating class of 2010 will get into "Geek Love" stuff, e.g., and 10 years later we'll see people wearing their kidneys on the outside.

And wakko, once again, not everybody who says things you don't like is "trolling".
posted by davy at 1:06 PM on August 10, 2005

"Stay away." - Nature
posted by rush at 1:09 PM on August 10, 2005

Yay for bigotry and deriding things one doesn't understand!
posted by glider at 1:10 PM on August 10, 2005

And I love how the "AIN IS FREEDOM" is in that stupid font they use on all the goth websites.

ain't that the truth.

it's "exocet" by emigre:

http://www.emigre.com/catalog.php?cat=TM04&page=31

seen here also:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120657/

one thing i love about this thread is how it is grossing out people with tattoos. yep, if you have a tatoo, that's about how gross you appear to people without tatoos. this is almost as entertaining as finding out there are people who worry if body modification isn't "pretty." yep, people were put on this planet for your visual interest.

personally, i'm very impressed with the scars which exhibit a high degree of draftsmanship. the others belong to possibly non-mentally ill people with whom i'd probably prefer not to make a habit of hanging out, finding no freedom in ain without faulting the investigation.

thanks for the scarwars link.
posted by 3.2.3 at 1:10 PM on August 10, 2005

Telling folks who cut themselves to "kill themselves" isn't trolling?

What the hell is wrong with you?
posted by wakko at 1:11 PM on August 10, 2005

Davy: So, you're arguing for the "stepping stone" theory of body mods? Ever smoke pot? Ever known someone that smoked pot? How likely is it that you think you or they will become a heroin addict?

Could it possibly be that these "extreme cases" already existed, and that they simply didn't have the technology or know-how to accomplish what they wanted, or didn't even know it was possible?

There's plenty of people that get a piercing or two and never get any more. Or they even take them out.

I'm one of those people. I took mine out for personal reasons, more or less because I was simply done with them. Beyond that I won't elaborate. It wasn't something I did in either case to fit in or not fit in. It was entirely a personal choice and experience. You couldn't see the piercings, anyway.
posted by loquacious at 1:14 PM on August 10, 2005

I wonder where the P ended up? on her neck in full view unless she wears a scarf all the time? - funambulist

It would be extra cool if there was a ":" in front of it.
posted by rush at 1:16 PM on August 10, 2005

loquacious : "You couldn't see the piercings, anyway."

Ah, kidney piercings?
posted by Bugbread at 1:16 PM on August 10, 2005

How about if the scarring is kept under clothing Davy? Can they teach then? What if they bleach their hair? Or is this one of those "I know if when I see it" objections?
posted by Shutter at 1:18 PM on August 10, 2005

Bugbread: Totally. Kidney piercings. Spleen piercings. Fifteen large intestine piercings. I could feed myself through my navel. Totally hardcore, man.

I even got a job as a professional lawn sprinkler, except I got fired when I stopped drinking water one day and switched to vodka and killed the putting green on the 18th hole at Pebble Beach.
posted by loquacious at 1:40 PM on August 10, 2005

I decided to go external, not internal. I pierced my table.
posted by Bugbread at 1:41 PM on August 10, 2005

You sick fucker. Did you even ask your table before you did it? I bet you coerced it, you masochistic fucktard.

Oh, hrm. I guess my tables get branded fairly often with my Dremel, soldering iron and cigarettes. Nevermind.
posted by loquacious at 1:44 PM on August 10, 2005

I'm thinking of going more extreme, though. Maybe making a big dent in the table with my hammer.
posted by Bugbread at 1:53 PM on August 10, 2005

loquacious, for pete's sake PAY ATTENTION.

Again, this is what I said: "And loquacious, I don't mean that these cut-up individuals will go on to chop off their lips or dent their heads. I mean that these kinds of fads get weirder, more extreme, and more damaging all the time. Maybe the graduating class of 2010 will get into "Geek Love" stuff, e.g., and 10 years later we'll see people wearing their kidneys on the outside."

Not "stepping stones" on an individual basis, but cultural trends getting more "extreme". Take the "evolution" of musical styles through the 2nd half of the 20th century, for example: the '50s generation freaked out their parents by digging Elvis, then in the '60s -- involving mostly people who were young then, i.e. probably not the same people as the Elvis fans -- it was hippie fashion and psychedelic rock, then in the '70s -- and again, involving (to use my "marker") another "graduating class" it was AC/DC etc. and "Disco Sucks!" T-shirts, and then further on -- years later in other, younger people -- it was "death metal" like Deicide, etc. etc. So it's rather unlikely that somebody who was an Elvis fan in high school in 1958 "stepping-stoned" into being a Deicide groupie in 1990; in fact it's possible that the Deicide fans were grandchildren of those who, when they were younger, were into Elvis. So have you got that? Are you with me so far?

Okay, so: first there was a fad of multiple ear-piercing -- several holes in one (or each) ear -- in the '80s. That had to be topped, so in the early '90s those "graduating classes" took to piercing their eyebrows and lips. Etc. etc. And now, to be even more "extreme" than the (usually older) people who did "body mods" years before, young people are scarring themselves. Do you understand yet?
posted by davy at 1:54 PM on August 10, 2005

Everyone get your swimsuits ready for davy's Slip 'N Slide Slope!
posted by agregoli at 1:57 PM on August 10, 2005

I said: "Okay, so: first there was a fad of multiple ear-piercing -- several holes in one (or each) ear -- in the '80s."

By which I don't mean that there were no other fads involving piercing before then, of course: in my day, the '70s, "kewl" young men pierced their left ear lobe once.

And agregoli, do you dispute that "fads get more 'extreme' over time"? If so, what planet do YOU live on?
posted by davy at 2:00 PM on August 10, 2005

Hey davy, I'm fascinated by your stepping stone theory. I'm wondering -- now that "homosexuality" is becoming normal, what do you think people will do to freak out their peers and families?

Oh wait... maybe alternative lifestyles exist because different people like different things, not because small groups of people want to differentiate themselves for the purpose of differentiation in and of itself.

If you really think this is some kind of one-upmanship, you're missing the point and are simply factually incorrect. The primary reason you plainskins are seeing more of it is because the media these days is more permissive so it's more obvious. This stuff has always been around in every culture... it's just usually more hidden than it is at this point in history.
posted by glider at 2:04 PM on August 10, 2005

I understand now perfectly. Thank you.

*gets off of Davy's lawn before he gets an assload of rock salt from a shotgun*
posted by loquacious at 2:09 PM on August 10, 2005

And agregoli, do you dispute that "fads get more 'extreme' over time"? If so, what planet do YOU live on?

Uh, yeah, I do. And what glider said.

And I live on Earth! Where do you live? =)
posted by agregoli at 2:10 PM on August 10, 2005

I love it when people call what is literally the oldest documentable form of human expression on the planet a "fad". Yeah, and being a homo sapien is just a trend for us genebags if you look at the big picture I suppose... ha...
posted by glider at 2:12 PM on August 10, 2005

glider: gorgeous. The lawyer ain't bad either.
posted by deborah at 2:14 PM on August 10, 2005

whoops - should have been "glider"
posted by deborah at 2:16 PM on August 10, 2005

Again, I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT "'STEPPING-STONE' THEORY". Learn the terminology.

As far as "it's always been around" goes, in the '70s it was still unusual for young people to get small tattoos on their arms.
posted by davy at 2:17 PM on August 10, 2005

posted by fixedgear at 2:17 PM on August 10, 2005

davy, yes, it was unusual for them to get tattoos on their forearms -- they got them on private skin back then. But they still got them, and in large numbers -- they just couldn't be as public about it.

Just like there were still gays in the 50s -- they just didn't have as many publicly gay bars back then, let alone gay characters in the media.
posted by glider at 2:19 PM on August 10, 2005

As far as "it's always been around" goes, in the '70s it was still unusual for young people to get small tattoos on their arms.

Uh, no it wasn't.
posted by agregoli at 2:20 PM on August 10, 2005

It's not even that it's more visible at this point in history. It's just more visible compared to the previous few hundred years of (Western / Christian) history.

If you had the ability to go back in time a thousand years or three thousand years, and suddenly had the ability to easily and quickly travel or communicate (visually) around the globe, you'd see even more 'extreme' body modification much more often than you do even now. A lot more. Even in European cultures.

Some of the examples of this past work might not be as technically advanced as some of today's examples, but in many (if not most) cultures around the world the modifications would be very refined both artistically and technically.

And the reasons then (as they are now) aren't as simple as "to fit in" or "to stand out". The reasons are very often cultural or spiritual or outright religious.

And of everyone I personally know that has metal, ink, or scars, the reasons for doing so are very distinctly spiritual or religious in nature. Despite whatever preconceptions you have, it's not a popularity contest. Or an "I'm more extreme than you" contest.

And no one should be so swift or so sure as to judge whether or not these spiritual expressions are valid or not.

Just because a human doesn't choose to self-identify with any particular religous movement or organized religion doesn't invalidate spiritual motivations or beliefs.

(On preview: Davy, you are talking about a cultural "stepping stone" theory, how can you not be? And history goes back farther than 1970. Or even 1900. Or even 0 AD. See above. It's an ancient practice, not a modern one.)
posted by loquacious at 2:23 PM on August 10, 2005

davy : "Take the 'evolution' of musical styles through the 2nd half of the 20th century"

Interesting sidepoint you bring up: it's always somewhat disappointed me that we seem to have rounded the cusp of extreme music. My grandpa's music was seen as extreme by my great-grandpa. My dad's music was seen as extreme by my grandpa. My music was seen as extreme by my dad. But looking at the music that's popular now, it looks like, instead of me finding my kid's musical tastes to be extreme, they'll be looking at my tastes as extreme instead.

glider : "Oh wait... maybe alternative lifestyles exist because different people like different things, not because small groups of people want to differentiate themselves for the purpose of differentiation in and of itself."

I'd say you're both right, in a sense. Alternative lifestyles exist because different people like different things. Some alternative lifestyles grow in popularity because some people have always liked them, but society frowned on them (homosexuality). Other alternative lifestyles grow in popularity as a way to freak out The Man. The issue isn't the existence of the lifestyle, but the popularity of it, and even then needs to be approached on a case-by-case basis.

And, I dunno, maybe my college bookstore just had the wrong magazines, but none of this branding/scarring stuff seems too new to me. This stuff was in BME (was that the name of the magazine, or am I just getting confused by your site name, glider?) back in the early 90's, if not earlier.
posted by Bugbread at 2:28 PM on August 10, 2005

glider : "I love it when people call what is literally the oldest documentable form of human expression on the planet a 'fad'."

It can be both, you know. Men wore skirts (ok, not called skirts, but functionally skirts) since years and years and years back. That said, there was a fad of men wearing skirts in the mid-90's. Wearing skirts was both extremely historical, and a fad.

(Once again, no direct relation to branding, just that the argument "it's old, therefore calling it a fad is incorrect" seems faulty)

loquacious : "And of everyone I personally know that has metal, ink, or scars, the reasons for doing so are very distinctly spiritual or religious in nature."

It may be the circles you're in (or it may be the circles I'm in). I don't know of anyone with a tattoo or a piercing that has done it for spiritual or religious reasons.
posted by Bugbread at 2:33 PM on August 10, 2005

My site -- BME has been around since 1994 (with BME/extreme -- NSFW -- launching a few years later), but there were a few offline magazines, mostly in the gay community, that documented these things back into the 70s and earlier. I've interviewed people who were involved in what we'd now call "extreme body modification" clubs back into the 1920s...

Re: extreme music.
I think that's a little different, because part of the reason music has grown more extreme is because music is a "literate" form of art, so the more you know about music the further you can push expression... thus its boundaries grow with time.
posted by glider at 2:34 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread, your points about "different" circles and that something can be both a trend and not-a-trend are certainly valid. I tend to hang out and document people who are into these things because it's who they are... I am aware that there are a large number of people who are doing it for fashion reasons, but I really don't pay much attention to them...

...getting back to the main link, I'd say that the people who are drawn to SCARWARS and similar events fall more into the "it's who I am" category than the "MTV says this is cool" category.
posted by glider at 2:37 PM on August 10, 2005

Glider: I remember now. It was "RE/Search".
posted by Bugbread at 2:41 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread: "Interesting sidepoint you bring up: it's always somewhat disappointed me that we seem to have rounded the cusp of extreme music."

It's still pushing forward. "Musique Concrete" or not. Experimental, noise, freetekno, acid, psychedelic and much more. Even rock/punk/pop is being pushed.

It's also spending a lot of time twiddling away and self-refining in thousands and thousands of genres and sub-genres. There's way more music (and more kinds of it) now than there ever were at any time, anywhere. You're just not going to find it at Wal-Mart or The Wherehouse or other chain stores. And a lot of it you can't even buy at indie record shops, and is only available directly from the artists in person, via mail, or on the internet.

Rest assured, it's being pushed like crazy. You have to dig for it, though.

I just went to a noise show two weeks ago that was wonderfully intense, and practically had more "artists" then there was "audience". (Well, 5-6 artists, about 15 people as "audience" in a beautifully crufty little art gallery. But then, 4-5 of those "audience" members were artists there to perform.)
posted by loquacious at 2:45 PM on August 10, 2005

non-mentally ill people

This may be news to some of you, but harming yourself on purpose is a sign of mental illness. As in they can check the box for "danger to self or others" on the admitting form and put a 72-hour hold on you.

I'm with Mayor Curley. At least these people could go to a burn unit and let someone who wants their healthy skin have some.

I think I'm going to invest in a scar-minimizing treatment (like the aforementioned "excision/recision, laser treatements, cortisone injections, Mederma, and plastic sheeting") clinic for when these things inevitably go out of fashion. Who's with me? There's money to be made!

And the reasons then (as they are now) aren't as simple as "to fit in" or "to stand out". The reasons are very often cultural or spiritual or outright religious.

These are human beings we are talking about. We are not rational, but we do rationalize, everything and anything under the sun. Oh of course the people doing it tell themselves they're not doing it to be trendy, because that would be tacky. But seriously, there are definite trends with body mods. Ignoring this factor entirely is rather disingenuous.

It's an ancient practice, not a modern one.

Uhhhh, are you arguing that being ancient somehow makes it more valid? Polio is ancient too, but we got rid of it because it involves serious damage to healthy bodies. That's what healthy people do - they minimize damage to their bodies.
posted by beth at 2:46 PM on August 10, 2005

This may be news to some of you, but harming yourself on purpose is a sign of mental illness.

I don't see any harm coming from these practices, and I don't think the people who engage in them consider it causing their bodies harm. More importantly, what harm does it cause anyone else if someone wants to do a body mod to their own body?

I think calling people who engage in body mods mentally ill is a little simplistic. We all know at least one person with a tattoo - is getting a tattoo a sign of mental illness?

Mental illness is determined by several factors for each disorder/problem, thank goodness. If one was the critieria, we'd have a LOT more artfully decorated people in mental wards.
posted by agregoli at 2:52 PM on August 10, 2005

beth = Ignorant, angry, closed-minded plainskin.

Oooh, tattooed people are mentally ill. Oooh, gays are deviant. Oooh, blacks are 2/3 human. Oooh, people who drive cars are suicidal. Oh wait, maybe not the last one, right? Not sure exactly where you draw your "I am this stupid" line.
posted by glider at 2:55 PM on August 10, 2005

I don't see any harm coming from these practices

Losing skin isn't "harm"? How do you figure?
posted by beth at 2:56 PM on August 10, 2005

loquacious : "It's still pushing forward. 'Musique Concrete' or not. Experimental, noise, freetekno, acid, psychedelic and much more. Even rock/punk/pop is being pushed."

I probably misphrased. I know that the bounds of extreme stuff is still being pushed (though, to be honest, I have yet to find something to top Masonna...though some Venetian Snares stuff comes close). What I meant is that the mainstream has curbed back. The stuff my grandpa thought was extreme was the popular stuff my dad listened to. The stuff my dad thought was extreme was the popular stuff I listened to. Now, when I listen to the popular stuff kids are listening to, it sounds like it's become less extreme.

beth : "This may be news to some of you, but harming yourself on purpose is a sign of mental illness."

Yes, but harming yourself in a controlled environment makes this sign less accurate. After all, plastic surgery and tattoing are harming yourself on purpose, but aren't considered signs of mental illness. And, conversely, jamming a pen under your skin repeatedly is a pretty good sign of mental illness, even though it's technically pretty much the same as tattoing. What's at issue isn't just what's done, but also how it's done.

I'm not saying none of these people are mentally ill. I'm just saying that what they're doing isn't ipso facto evidence of mental illness.
posted by Bugbread at 2:56 PM on August 10, 2005

Not sure exactly where you draw your "I am this stupid" line.

Well, the people who clearly label themselves through body mods really help my sorting endeavors. It's actually quite helpful.
posted by beth at 2:57 PM on August 10, 2005

beth, that's ridiculous. Body modification is dramatically less dangerous than playing highschool football or any number of other things we accept as "normal". You're displaying cultural prejudice and nothing more.
posted by glider at 3:01 PM on August 10, 2005

Wow. Some of those are really quite beautiful.

Of course if someone I cared about ever actually TRIED to do something like that, I'd haul'em off to a psychiatrist too. They'd definately need a doctors note before they could play that game (semi-joking).

'Course I have tatoos too, so I guess I'm a hypocrite...oh well.
posted by elendil71 at 3:09 PM on August 10, 2005

Look, the tattoo people don't freak me out. Neither do the piercers (except maybe that chick with 23432432423 pieces of metal in her face). Branding? Meh. All three of those aren't that big of a deal, in the grand scheme of things.

Removing swaths of healthy skin? That's a whole nother ballgame. A line is crossed. You can do whatever you want with your body (mostly kinda), but once you go uber-xxxtreme with the body mods, a huge proportion of the population is no longer going to take you seriously, and is going to assume that there's something wrong with your judgment.

What's next? Chopping off fingers and toes? Oh, no wait, I've already seen that on BME. :D
posted by beth at 3:10 PM on August 10, 2005

But seriously, there are definite trends with body mods. Ignoring this factor entirely is rather disingenuous.

I'm not ignoring that factor at all. People that do even the most simple body mods because they're somehow hip or trendy frankly disgust me - mainly with their ignorance of the subject. Even tattoos. I try to dissuade people from getting them all the time.

Uhhhh, are you arguing that being ancient somehow makes it more valid?

Culturally, in the context of arguing against "This is just [and only] a stupid fad!", fuck yes it does.

Does 2,000 years of Christian history make it more "valid" in the eyes of most? You bet your sweet biscuits it does. Imagine some cracker trying to foist that stuff off on people as though it were brand new.

Polio is ancient too, but we got rid of it because it involves serious damage to healthy bodies.

Hurr! Nice straw man. Polio is an external disease, not an art form or self expression or spiritual mandate.

That's what healthy people do - they minimize damage to their bodies.

And that's what healthy body modifiers do. Practice safety and play safely. Your average body modifier isn't suddenly disabled or maimed or actually injured by their practices. Sure, there's accidents, or experiments. Even infections.

If you were arguing against dumbasses going and getting their noses pierced with a piercing gun at the mall rather than going to an experienced, trained body piercer with nice, clean, sharp needles, I'd agree with you.

And even the more extreme modifiers would argue that their *ahem* strange and apparently extreme genital modifications make them more functional, in regard to what they want and personally desire out of life.

But what the hell? People leap off of cliffs. I skateboard halfpipes and bowls and pools. I've biked up and down mountains, climbed peaks, and taken all kinds of risks. Hell, I've biked on smog days in LA in rush hour traffic. I've taken all kinds of risks with my body and health. Do any of these things make me mentally ill?

We're not machines of the church or state here for your protection or safekeeping.

There is no single "optimum" human experience.


So why bother to judge, except to support and foster your own prejudices and preconceptions that these people specifically and (wrongly) are all mentally ill or somehow doing themselves a disservice? Or doing themselves harm? Or are a threat to themselves or others?

Bigotry is bigotry.
posted by loquacious at 3:12 PM on August 10, 2005

Beth, if your issue is with just being freaked out, I don't think there's much of an issue. I don't want to speak for anyone else, though, so: glider, loq, jairus: do any of you have a problem with people being freaked out by this?
posted by Bugbread at 3:14 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread : What I meant is that the mainstream has curbed back. The stuff my grandpa thought was extreme was the popular stuff my dad listened to. The stuff my dad thought was extreme was the popular stuff I listened to. Now, when I listen to the popular stuff kids are listening to, it sounds like it's become less extreme.

Ahh, sorry. See, I agree with that. But I think it's because "popular music" is no longer in full control of the distribution path. It now only controls what it can manufacture, and is therefore happily eating away all of it's limbs like a panicked and hungry octopus.
posted by loquacious at 3:15 PM on August 10, 2005

beth, how in the world does someone reshaping their body in a way that makes them happy imply anything negative? This is about whether you're comfortable with someone else setting their own terms of self-expression and self-definition in a way that's dramatically different than your own or not.

It's explicitly NOT about mental health issues. Take a walk through a psyche ward and count the number of piercings or heavily tattooed people you see and you'll note that there are a lot more plainskins than there are modified people.

The only part of what you're saying that I agree with is the once you go uber-xxxtreme with the body mods, a huge proportion of the population is no longer going to take you seriously claim, but that's a statement as to the ignorance of the average muggle, not a statement about the modified.

...and cutting off fingers? Hello 30,000 BC.
posted by glider at 3:16 PM on August 10, 2005

I would feel better about this if I knew more about the qualifications of the artists, or more specifically, about the precautions they take to avoid infections. Do they know how to avoid the kind of uncontrolled scaring that Aspargirl is talking about? Are they confident they aren't going to pass an MRSA around their little event?

I don't so much doubt their intelligence as I suspect them of being boring. Are there more exciting ways to experience pain?

I've know lots of smart people who do weird destructive stuff -- the smartest person I've ever known tweaked himself out of a scholarship to Yale and 20 years later struggles to hold down a job at the Olive Garden -- but most of the people I meet who are into body modification seem pretty narcissistic and shallow. Kind of like people in my generation who were into extreme fashion or obcessed with preppiness, only even creepier.
posted by gesamtkunstwerk at 3:19 PM on August 10, 2005

glider : "Take a walk through a psyche ward and count the number of piercings or heavily tattooed people you see and you'll note that there are a lot more plainskins than there are modified people."

Once again, I'm not disagreeing with what you're getting at, but the logic seems flawed. Take, for example, a population with 90% people who do A, and 10% people who do B. Give people who do A a mentally ill rate of 10%, and people who do B a mentally ill rate of 50%. Your theoretical psyche ward would have 9 people who do A for every 5 people who do B. A outnumbers B, but B has a higher incidence of mental illness.
posted by Bugbread at 3:21 PM on August 10, 2005

So why bother to judge, except to support and foster your own prejudices and preconceptions that these people specifically and (wrongly) are all mentally ill or somehow doing themselves a disservice? Or doing themselves harm? Or are a threat to themselves or others?

Because I fear for the ones who will follow in their footsteps. First, I fear for the ones who will do it unsafely and end up with really horrid results. Second, I fear for the ones who will regret it later on and find that it's irreversible. Third, I fear for the ones who really are mentally unbalanced, and need psychiatric help.

Also I fear the idea of some nutter convincing my child that this would be a cool thing to do. Heaven forfend.

And... "bigotry"? I'm not dismissing people for things that are out of their control - I am judging them based on choices that they make.
posted by beth at 3:21 PM on August 10, 2005

beth: do you know anyone that wears earrings?
posted by nylon at 3:23 PM on August 10, 2005

I don't have any problem with people being freaked out or taken aback by anything different or outside of their experience. New stuff is generally kind of freaky.

I do have a problem with preconception and prejudice, and a lack of any attempts to even trying to understand why.

I speak in general terms only, and don't wish to point out specific examples, in this thread or out, and would rather at least attempt to refrain from pointing fingers.

Frankly, like I said (way above) the cutting scarification thing both disturbs me and intrigues me. Aesthetically.
posted by loquacious at 3:23 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread, I don't mind that people are freaked out a bit that I have my face tattooed and big stretched ears and magnets implanted in my fingers and a split tongue and all that... but I do mind if they try and restrict my rights because of those decisions.

Luckily I have the financial might that no one can really hold me down, but that's not the case for most people who've chosen this path...

gesamtkunstwerk, most of the artists that were working at Scar Wars were highly qualified -- they were chosen and invited for that reason (not to say there aren't hacks out there that are dangerous). As far as what Aspargirl is talking about, well, she's talking out of her ass -- I've been documenting this for over a decade and I've never seen it happen. It's not that sort of scarification.

I don't think your characterization of people into body modification being shallow is fair -- if anything it's more of a reflection of who LET'S YOU KNOW... You're only seeing the tip of the iceberg, and the tip is by definition going to be the narcissistic part.

And this isn't about "experiencing pain"; rarely is the pain a factor other than in a limiting sense.
posted by glider at 3:23 PM on August 10, 2005

beth : "And... 'bigotry'? I'm not dismissing people for things that are out of their control - I am judging them based on choices that they make."

So you're cool with people who want to scar or brand themselves, but not with folks who do?

(That's not a rhetorical challenge question, it's a straightforward question)
posted by Bugbread at 3:24 PM on August 10, 2005

glider : "bugbread, I don't mind that people are freaked out a bit that I have my face tattooed and big stretched ears and magnets implanted in my fingers and a split tongue and all that..."

Ok, now, for the first time, I consider you a bit of a freak. Not for the face tattoes, or stretched ears, or having-things-implanted-in-fingers, or split tongue...but for your choice of implants. MAGNETS?! Do you hate your computer that much?!
posted by Bugbread at 3:25 PM on August 10, 2005

If people have always done it somewhere, it's inherently noble and good. Like human sacrifice. Infanticide, too. That goes way back. How sad that modern man has lost his way and left those proud traditions behind.

And no way is body dysmorphia a real mental illness. That's just, like, what the death dealers want you to think because we could totally reawaken mankind by removing our fingers and bits of skin!
posted by Mayor Curley at 3:26 PM on August 10, 2005

beth, I'm that guy convincing your kid. I'm here to tell them that it's HEALTHY and POSITIVE, and that if they are drawn to it, they SHOULD do it. It's good for people. They should express themselves and CREATE THEMSELVES. They should make themselves more than they are.

Sad that you're the person telling your kid to stay a slave and not live their life they way they feel is right.

And bugbread, I'm saying that there is a negative link between body modification and mental illness. That is, mentally ill people are LESS LIKELY to be modified than people who are not mentally ill. I believe this is in part because a person who has control over their own fate (even if it's just making decisions about their body) is more balanced and happy.
posted by glider at 3:28 PM on August 10, 2005

glider : "As far as what Aspargirl is talking about, well, she's talking out of her ass -- I've been documenting this for over a decade and I've never seen it happen. It's not that sort of scarification."

I'm curious: how do you prevent keloid scarring for someone with a genetic predisposition to keloid scarring?
posted by Bugbread at 3:29 PM on August 10, 2005

This turned into a much more interesting discussion after glider came by in person

I still wouldn't do any of them to myself, though.

* plainskin representin' *
posted by yhbc at 3:30 PM on August 10, 2005

glider : "And bugbread, I'm saying that there is a negative link between body modification and mental illness. That is, mentally ill people are LESS LIKELY to be modified than people who are not mentally ill."

Like I say, I'm not disagreeing with your conclusions (I'm not agreeing with them either). Just pointing out that one of your arguments used sloppy logic. I'm anal like that (and, yeah, I appreciate it when people point out my own sloppy logic. I'm anal like that too).
posted by Bugbread at 3:31 PM on August 10, 2005

First, I fear for the ones who will do it unsafely and end up with really horrid results.

A valid concern. The solution? Talk about it openly, and allow information about it to flow.

Second, I fear for the ones who will regret it later on and find that it's irreversible.

Another valid concern. The solution? Talk about it openly. Foster a culture that knows and expresses this.

Third, I fear for the ones who really are mentally unbalanced, and need psychiatric help.

If they are mentally ill, they've got bigger issues than a few scratches and scars on their skins. And generally speaking, from anecdotal experience, most in-depth body mod artists don't want their artwork walking around on some nutjob's skin.

Also I fear the idea of some nutter convincing my child that this would be a cool thing to do. Heaven forfend.

But what if your child intuitively or instinctively chose something like this? And sincerely, honestly desired it? And it made them feel happier?

Note that we're not talking about random obsessive-compulsive self-abuse and mutilation here. We're not talking about your child stealing and hiding razorblades and secretively cutting themselves. We're talking about a sincere self expression that may or may not be ritualistic or spiritual in nature.

Heaven forfend, it may even be sensual or decedent in nature.
posted by loquacious at 3:31 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread, I have magnets implanted so that I can "see" into the EM spectrum... I literally have an "extra sense" because of them. It's pretty wild. It's no danger to my computer by the way, but I can feel exactly where the drives are in a laptop computer (and what they're doing) just by running my hand about an inch over the keyboard.
posted by glider at 3:32 PM on August 10, 2005

How do you avoid accidentally wiping out data?
posted by Bugbread at 3:33 PM on August 10, 2005

It takes a very powerful magnet to wipe out data.... These are small enough to not even affect credit cards, but still enough to interact with my nervous system.
posted by glider at 3:34 PM on August 10, 2005

Ah.

When you say "interact with my nervous system", do you just mean that you can feel the pull of the magnets, and thereby feel the presence of magnetic fields, or is there something more complicated than that? (The day shift is rolling in, so I can't really click on that link)
posted by Bugbread at 3:35 PM on August 10, 2005

If people have always done it somewhere, it's inherently noble and good. Like human sacrifice. Infanticide, too. That goes way back. How sad that modern man has lost his way and left those proud traditions behind.

Again, straw man. Those are things someone did to someone else without their consent.

And no way is body dysmorphia a real mental illness. That's just, like, what the death dealers want you to think because we could totally reawaken mankind by removing our fingers and bits of skin!

At most, someone could awaken something in themselves. Or it could simply be a pretty way (or not so pretty way, subjectively speaking) of releasing lots and lots endorphins.

Nothing wrong with that in my book.
posted by loquacious at 3:36 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread, the magnets (which are coated in a medical silicone) move under my skin when they're affected by a magnetic field, which stimulates the nerves. It feels kind of like moving my hand into a really strong vibratory static electricity field. It certainly doesn't feel like "something moving under my skin", but at the same time it's not a totally NEW sense either... sort of like extending my sense of touch into the EM range so I can reach out and feel an EM field.
posted by glider at 3:39 PM on August 10, 2005

Damn! Now I'm freaked out! I want magnets! If I think it's horseshit I can just take 'em out later. HOT DAMN!
posted by loquacious at 3:40 PM on August 10, 2005

Bugbread: That magnet link is safe for work - depending on where you work, outside of a small amount of blood for a couple of pics. It's 90% text by volume. There's no nudity or 'obscenity' or anything.

BME: Did you have other modifications before this particular “upgrade”?

TODD: Before this my body modifications have been limited to piercing, both cosmetic and play. Our society has perfected the art of pain avoidance and disassociation from our bodies. Piercing and other body modifications bring the mind back to the body and increase a person’s awareness of their physical self. For such a materialistic society, America has lost touch with their physical self.

Word.
posted by loquacious at 3:46 PM on August 10, 2005

I have magnets implanted

as someone who's spent many hours performing electromagnetic site surveys on client sites with expensive and sometimes faulty flux gate magnetometers, I have to say how totally awesome this is. Respect to you, glider.
posted by nylon at 3:49 PM on August 10, 2005

loquacious, YOU said, quote, "Davy: So, you're arguing for the "stepping stone" theory of body mods? Ever smoke pot? Ever known someone that smoked pot? How likely is it that you think you or they will become a heroin addict?"

This correctly uses the term "'stepping stone' theory": that is what that term means. (I disagree with that theory, by the way; it's hoodoo.) That is, it's a particular term that "belongs" to a particular theory about a particular subject, in this case drug use.

Another example is "social construction": Habitat For Humanity does not engage in "social construction" when they have what used to be called "house-raising parties". Nor is someone "practicing 'totalitarianism'" when they're doing arithmetic homework.

So the first time you used "stepping stone" correctly, you just used it in a context that did not apply -- as you might have known if you'd read and absorbed the comment you were responding to (assuming that you really did know what "stepping stone theory" meant). Trying to cover up your mistake like that only underlines it.

And glider, how old are you? I was a teenager in the '70s, and short sleeved and sleeveless T-shirts were common among most people under say 60, so from April through October there were a LOT of bare arms all over the place. So I know for a fact that tattoos anywhere on the arm were NOT common: usually it meant personal experience in the military and/or a motorcycle gang. Most young people did not have them, and those that did were, 99% of the time, male (and for that matter usually white).

What WAS "trendy" or "faddish" (or "hip, now and with-it") among young white men were mullets and T-shirts celebrating heavy metal bands, hetero sex, pot smoking and beer drinking. ("Happines is a tight pussy!" was one; the illustration was a drunken kitten curled up inside a liquor bottle. Get it? "Tight pussy"? Ha ha ha, I'm sure.) But "body mods" for young men were usually just a single stud earring worn in the lobe of the left ear -- or on the right if you were gay. (Another, even less common, place for tattoos was on the chest: those were almost always military-and/or-biker-related; I don't recall seeing anybody with a tattooed face in the '70s, not even in San Francisco and L.A.)

Again, I know these things because I was there then, old enough to remember clearly, and got around quite a bit. Arguing with me about this only makes you look young and stupid.

(And hey, just think: when y'all are old enough for college you can take an Intro to Sociology course!)

And by the way, it makes a lot more sense to me to "release endorphins" by A) taking drugs, B) petting a furry animal, C) getting a sexual release (with another or alone), or D) jogging for hours (though option D is not in my repertoire). People who harm themselves by cutting, burning, branding and/or stabbing themselves, or for that matter soaking in suphuric acid, should learn there are easier, and usually less self-destructive, ways to "release endorphins". Pet a fuzzy kitten, there are zillions at animal shelters.
posted by davy at 3:54 PM on August 10, 2005

Seriously, nylon. I think I just had a brain orgasm. Just the thought of it is making me look around the computer room and ponder what it'd be like to feel all the magnetic fields all around me. Hell, you could probably even train yourself to feel larger electrical currents generating magnetic fields.

I wonder if smaller or larger magnets would be better. Or tiny arrays of very small but very strong magnets? Goddamn, you could feel textures or shapes in magnetic fields.
posted by loquacious at 3:54 PM on August 10, 2005

Do they know how to avoid the kind of uncontrolled scaring that Aspargirl is talking about?

Unfortunately, there is no known way (yet) to prevent hypertrophic/keloid scarring in a person who is genetically likely to develop it. So those people are really playing with fire knives, since they have no way of knowing how their bodies will react. While I did see iodine rubbed around one of the scars in the photo, I would bet they're not pre- or post-dosing themselves with broad-spectrum antibiotics, either--cause gangrene and its pretty pretty colors would be totally wicked!

In the case of my stomach scar, cutting out the old scar tissue, having a specialized surgeon re-stitch it using teeny tiny stitches, applying pressure bandages (plastic sheeting taped on), and lying flat on my back for three weeks during one summer so it could heal did jack shit to prevent a reoccurance of the scar, just as big and bumpy as before. But now it's redder and has a slight loss of sensation. Swell.

But I've read--not on the linked site, but another scarrification site whose name I don't remember--that some people actually rub dirt into the open wound to try to create the kind of raised, puffy scar tissue that I wish I and my family didn't tend to develop. On a libertarian level, I think they can do whatever the hell they want; it's a free country. But on a personal level, for obvious reasons, I think what they're doing is exquisitely sick.
posted by Asparagirl at 3:55 PM on August 10, 2005

loquacious : "Our society has perfected the art of pain avoidance and disassociation from our bodies."

Dunno about the disassociation bit, but if the pain bit is true, then our society has perfected the art of doing what our body wants it to do. Pain is the "hey, stop that!!" signal provided by evolution. Not saying necessarily that what our body wants is good for us (our bodies want heaping helpings of sugar, but if we give it as much as it wants we get cardiac arrest and die), but somehow the idea that society perfecting the art of pain avoidance is somehow naturally a bad thing seems extremely out of touch with evolution and the body.
posted by Bugbread at 3:56 PM on August 10, 2005

Frikkin Awesome!
posted by Edible Energy at 3:59 PM on August 10, 2005

"On a libertarian level, I think they can do whatever the hell they want; it's a free country. But on a personal level, for obvious reasons, I think what they're doing is exquisitely sick."

WORD.

And also: "Pain is the "hey, stop that!!" signal provided by evolution."

WORD^2.

And hey, y'all kids with implanted magnets, don't you know bullshit "science" when you see it? Oh wait, I bet you're into astrology and "auras" and stuff too, huh.
posted by davy at 4:00 PM on August 10, 2005

davy, I'm not pulling this stuff out of my ass. I've written multiple books on the subject, am interviewed on the subject weekly, and if you watch that sort of show, you've probably seem me on Discovery and TLC and stations like that...

Asparagirl, as I stated earlier, your statements re:scarification are misleading and incorrect. You're connecting subjects in a way that is nonsensical...
posted by glider at 4:00 PM on August 10, 2005

Again, I know these things because I was there then, old enough to remember clearly, and got around quite a bit. Arguing with me about this only makes you look young and stupid.

That's laughable.

don't you know bullshit "science" when you see it?

I do, as a matter of fact, but this isn't it.
So how about it, loquacious? I'm game if you are.
posted by nylon at 4:06 PM on August 10, 2005

davy : "And hey, just think: when y'all are old enough for college you can take an Intro to Sociology course!"

Googling around, Glider is at least 30, so I think you're slightly off your mark on that guess.
posted by Bugbread at 4:06 PM on August 10, 2005

Wow...13,000 hits on Google for "Shannon Larratt" (Glider's real name).
posted by Bugbread at 4:08 PM on August 10, 2005

Really? How is it nonsensical to talk about a genetic condition that causes over-active collagen production in a wound site, leading to pretty awful-looking (oh, but that's just my opinion) and ocassionally movement-limiting (hello, adhesions?) scar tissue? And that, unless people know they're at risk for it before undergoing a deep cut, there's really no way* to treat it effectively?

Do tell, because several generations of my family would love to hear this.

* actually, I've read on MedLine that radioactive seed implantation is a last-ditch resort to deal with persistent keloids and has shown some promise, but I'm not willing to go that far, especially in my childbearing years.
posted by Asparagirl at 4:08 PM on August 10, 2005

Davy: Arguing with me about this only makes you look young and stupid.

So what does that make you? Old and obsolete? If it's too loud you're too... how does that go?

And by the way, it makes a lot more sense to me to "release endorphins" by A) taking drugs, B) petting a furry animal, C) getting a sexual release (with another or alone), or D) jogging for hours

I've done A, B, C and D. (Well, I'm not a jogger, but a cyclist and hiker. When younger I used to do 500+ miles on a bike a week) And I've done E) Meditation. and F) Photonic/optical brainwave modification. I've also done G) Thrill rides and other adrenalin activities, including bungee jumps, cliff diving and paintball. See also: Skateboarding, halfpipes, surfing, bodyboarding or bodysurfing (including 20+ foot hurricane swells), which combines D and G to delcious effect. Exercise and adrenaline. Yummy.

However, lets call "pain" and/or "body mods" H.

They're very, very direct. Efficient. Primal. Introspective. And intense. And they're different, in form, function, texture, and aesthetics. And just as vaild (from the dopamine viewpoint) as A, B, C, D, E, F, and G.

And frankly, all of the above involve varying amounts of risk. Especially petting kittens. Those beastly little things can just straight fuck your shit up with cute. Oh, and claws.

And D, E, and G often involve a lot of beneficial or unavoidable H as well. "Feel the burn", as they say.
posted by loquacious at 4:10 PM on August 10, 2005

davy, I'm not pulling this stuff out of my ass. I've written multiple books on the subject, am interviewed on the subject weekly, and if you watch that sort of show, you've probably seem me on Discovery and TLC and stations like that...

He doesn't have to provide you with evidence-- he says it's true and he's been on basic cable. If Paige Davis told you she could shoot lasers out of her eyes because she had a 9-volt up her butt, you wouldn't question it would you?

Face it. You're just seeing shadows on the cave wall. Science is a lie and people with shit stapled to their faces are saner than people who wouldn't do that-- some who's met Bill Curtis said it!
posted by Mayor Curley at 4:10 PM on August 10, 2005

That "unless people know they're at risk" should be "even if people know they're at risk", in my post above.
posted by Asparagirl at 4:12 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley : "Science is a lie"

I don't think anyone (other than yourself) has said this, and yet you say it as if it's a sarcastic treatment of something someone has said.
posted by Bugbread at 4:15 PM on August 10, 2005

Nylon: I am extremely curious. I want to do some research first, and think about where I'd want them implanted. Probably fingertips, or somewhere else on my hand.

Not being able to type properly for a few weeks or months is a seriously huge commitment for me.

I think I'll start by taking some small rare-earth magnets and taping them to a sensitive area on my hands and trying to extrapolate from there. I might even be able to make an array of small chips of rare earth magnets and see if it's possible to feel any (obviously muted) textures in fields.

What I'm already thinking about is using a small array of brown rice sized (maybe slightly larger) grains of rare earth magnets, encapsulated in silicon and embedded with a hollow needle or the like. Two or three, or maybe four per fingertip or implant area.

Warning: A very, very valid concern would be that if the magnets were too strong, and you had some in multiple pockets in, say, the same fingertip they'd attract to each other and migrate, causing mild to severe complications.

But I could easily see using a matrix of flexible silicon that allowed the magnet-grains some movement for tactility, but kept them embedded and apart from each other.
posted by loquacious at 4:18 PM on August 10, 2005

Asparagirl, the "genetic condition" you're talking about isn't really relevant here. That's why.
posted by glider at 4:18 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley : "Science is a lie"

Ah, it occurs to me: unless this comment is in reference to people with a genetic propensity for keloid scarring, in which case science hasn't really been called a lie, but keloid scarring has been referred to, for some reason, as being unconnected with aesthetic scarring practice. I do hope we get a bit of information about why it's an unconnected issue.
posted by Bugbread at 4:23 PM on August 10, 2005

glider : "Asparagirl, the 'genetic condition' you're talking about isn't really relevant here. That's why."

Why is it not relevant here? "That's why" isn't an answer.
posted by Bugbread at 4:23 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread, do you think people should not go to university because they might discover that they have a 60 IQ and fail out? Of course not, because someone with a 60 IQ isn't going to get accepted in the first place, just like a blind person isn't going to get a driver's license because the pre-existing condition that precludes it will be obvious in advance.

The genetic condition that Asparagirl is describing would be obvious before someone undertook scarification as a form of body art because it would cause problems in their youth from cuts and scrapes, and then from things like shaving later in life. It's simply not relevant. Do I agree that someone with that condition shouldn't get scarification? Yeah, most likely. But do I think that the average adult shouldn't get scarification out of the fear that they might have it? No, that's silly...

As I said, in over a decade of documenting this artform, I have never seen this problem once among the hundreds of thousands of people I have photos of and have corresponded with.
posted by glider at 4:37 PM on August 10, 2005

glider : "The genetic condition that Asparagirl is describing would be obvious before someone undertook scarification as a form of body art because it would cause problems in their youth from cuts and scrapes, and then from things like shaving later in life."

Thanks.
posted by Bugbread at 4:39 PM on August 10, 2005

I just want to say that this is easily the most interesting thread I've read on MeFi this month. Shannon, I've been aware of your site for years, and I'm going to say in all honesty that I mostly regarded it with disgust. However, after reading through this thread, I'm truly not sure where I stand as far as the more extreme forms of body modification goes. I guess I feel that there is a definite limit.

I don't know, it's still really hard for me to read a lot of this without cringing, but then I also realize that I'm not really taking into account the reasons why people would do these things to themselves. I truly don't know what to think about it, but I'm glad that this thread is here.

Reading that interview with the man who implanted magnets in his fingertips was pretty mindblowing, though, and the (totally obvious (now that I see it)) realization that there's an actual purpose behind these modifications definitely puts it in a new light for me.
posted by jimmy at 4:44 PM on August 10, 2005

And another thing, people willingly getting these "extreme body mods" are telling me they're silly masochists with no self-respect, i.e. willing little prey-toys. And y'all pay people to do this shit to you? Damn, I am in the wrong the business.

How much do y'all pay people to "help release endorphins"? Maybe I could get a motorcycle after all. I just won't be telling too many guys in the bars how I could afford it, is all; they might compete with me for trade.

("So I said 'Bitch, if you don't bring me a beer quick I won't make you cry and bleed, no matter what you pay.' I counted to ten and there was no beer there, so I threw him out and closed up shop. It ain't like I need another $500, and there's a ball game and cold beer here.")

Oh and bugbread said "Glider is at least 30". That's something else is I think is very sad.
posted by davy at 4:54 PM on August 10, 2005

jimmy, thank you... my feeling is that there's no limit as long as the person doing it experiences that it's improving their life on some level.

I'm not saying there aren't people doing these things because of some negative pathology, but they're in the minority, even if they are at times the most visible -- for example, the oft-quoted doctors have a negative opinion of the subject because the only people they come in contact with are the people who have had a serious problem of some sort... Imagine if driving cars was somehow "underground" and the public perceived morticians as the "experts" on the subject -- we would have a truly horrifying view of the automobile!
posted by glider at 4:55 PM on August 10, 2005

Davy: So set up shop as a Domme and learn the ropes (heh!) of power exchange play. People pay a shit ton of money for that. But they're usually men! But you don't even have to touch them, really. In fact, in most jurisdictions it's illegal. Just slap 'em around a bit.

You could get a motorcycle and some spiffy leather chaps and then you could write them off as business deductions!
posted by loquacious at 4:59 PM on August 10, 2005

Davy, how are they "telling" you this? I'd say you're simply telling yourself that in lieu of actually hearing their stories.

And saying that this is all to "release endorphins" is like saying that sex is just about clearing toxins out of the prostate and avoiding cancer. It's silly, shallow, joyless, and entirely misses the point.

Why are you sad that I'm over 30? Are you also sad that I'm a multimillionare? Or that my computer science work has been featured in WIRED and a ton of other journals since the mid 80s? What's wrong with me being a happy, successful adult, other than it not jiving with the prejudices you're trying to espouse... oh no, I'm pretty sure there are successful black men out there as well!

Humans are a broad species and there are many valid ways to live and be happy... support others in their paths and they'll support you in return.
posted by glider at 5:00 PM on August 10, 2005

Glider: I take it, then, that your feelings have changed somewhat? Back when you were 24 (dunno how old you are now), you said "The only thing that I don't like to see is involuntary body modification and modifications done for the wrong reasons, such as various mental illnesses. And this is unfortunately far too common. My estimate would be that well over half, possibly as high as ninety percent of modifications are carried out for negative reasons, but I'm a pretty cynical person. It's probably not really that high."

I'm not getting on your case for inconsistency (it's been over 6 years; I would be far more suprised if your opinions didn't change), but I'm curious as to what caused the change of heart.
posted by Bugbread at 5:02 PM on August 10, 2005

People who harm themselves by cutting, burning, branding and/or stabbing themselves, or for that matter soaking in suphuric acid, should learn there are easier, and usually less self-destructive, ways to "release endorphins".

You got a point. I wonder why they don't just hit themselves in the head with a hammer, because it feels so good when you stop.
posted by jonmc at 5:05 PM on August 10, 2005

bugbread - Ha ha, yeah, I've mellowed out a little in my old age, in part from being more balanced but more from being more knowledgeable and actually having done real rather than anecdoctal research! That was a very pessimistic period. I agree with the core statement, but disagree with the numbers. If I had to guess now I'd put the number at 5%.
posted by glider at 5:08 PM on August 10, 2005

jonmc: Because hitting yourself in the head with a hammer doesn't really do much for the old endorphin release? Besides, if you do that too often, you don't get to live a nice, long life filled with future endorphin releases. How about a nice, stout spanking instead? Come hither, flannel boy! Bring me my belt!
posted by loquacious at 5:10 PM on August 10, 2005

Because hitting yourself in the head with a hammer doesn't really do much for the old endorphin release?

But the upside is you'd be too brain damaged to notice.

How about a nice, stout spanking instead? Come hither, flannel boy! Bring me my belt!

Wow, look at the time....
posted by jonmc at 5:15 PM on August 10, 2005

jonmc : "But the upside is you'd be too brain damaged to notice."

Downside is you'd have to be brain damaged beforehand to even do it, knowing that the only benefit you'll get out is being too brain damaged to notice it wasn't fun.
posted by Bugbread at 5:19 PM on August 10, 2005

Or, y'know, you could just drink yourself into brain damage. ;)
posted by loquacious at 5:19 PM on August 10, 2005

glider, let me restate what I was saying, using small words.

Some people have a genetic condition where their skin, when cut, will develop keloid or hypertrophic scars. These scars can have serious aesthetic consequences, and sometimes can cause health concerns. And there's really no way to deal with them effectively, even with surgery, lasers, blah blah blah.

Lots of people with this genetic predisposition have no idea they have it, even as an adult, unless they've had a serious cut, the kind that would need stitches. Even in my case, where several family members have the tendency, no one, including doctors, put it together and realized it was a family trait until after my 2nd surgery, the one that healed the same way. Suddenly, my aunt's childhood chin scar, my dad's appendix scar, etc. made sense. (The doctors tended to disbelieve it because we're not African-American, who most commonly get keloids, and this side of the family is blonde/redhead/blue-eyed/super-pale. Or it was because they wanted to believe that their magic cream/potion/laser would solve everything.)

Furthermore, certain areas of the body, especially the torso, back, chest, and upper arms are more likely to develop keloids than, say, a leg or a foot. We've all cut ourselves shaving (legs or face, depending on gender), but cutting your stomach or back is a slightly different case.

Someone who tends to heal keloid--but who doesn't know that yet--could go decide to something as simple as piercing their ears. And whoops, they suddenly have a hell of a lot more collagen than they were planning on, not to mention no place to hang the earring. This is probably the most commonly seen type of keloid scar in dermatologists' offices, because it's a common form of body modification. But if more people turn to more extreme forms of modification, dermatologists are going to get a lot busier, and the potential health consequences can be worse than just an aesthetic issue.

A teenager or adult who unknowingly tends to heal keloid who goes whole-hog and carves " I [heart] 311" in his back, may wake up six weeks later and realize that he can't move his shoulder blades so well. And the thin script letters would probably be unreadable as distinct entities anyway, the collagen having overflowed the original width of the scar by several inches. Suddenly, it's not so kewl.

Thus, when considering carving a design into someone's back, especially if he/she is of African-American descent or knows his/her family carries this trait, you may want to hold off in favor of advocating, say, a tattoo. Or you could at least advocate, as a harm reduction measure, that a person choose a site, like a lower leg, that would be less likely to turn keloid, and maybe see how that does over a six month period.

So basically, the problem here--which I stated in my first comment--is one of informed consent. Do people who get these scars know whether they may be at risk for overgrown scars? Do the scar-ers ask them about their medical history? Do they warn African-Americans wanting the procedure that they're at much higher risk for this outcome? How is follow-up care treated? What if something goes wrong?

No, I don't think this is irrelevant at all. As someone invovled with showcasing and popularizing the practice, I'd think you'd want to take a medical concern a bit more seriously.
posted by Asparagirl at 5:28 PM on August 10, 2005

Asparagirl - I'm perfectly aware of those medical issues and have written about them at length, but you're simply incorrect in your interpretation of them, and I say that with over a decade of experience in the subject. In simple terms, first of all, that type of scarring is generally a GOOD thing because it makes the scar look better, and second of all, because if they have that condition to the point where it's a run-away issue and endangers them, they're aware of it as a preexisting condition.

I apologize, I know you've gone to a lot of effort to write this long post and I'm sure you feel very clever and righteous, but real-world experience and more indepth knowledge pretty much invalidate the entirity of what you've written...

Rather than these theoretical posts, why don't you find me a statisticly meaningful number of examples... oh wait... you can't, because they don't exist, and you're just another fearmongering plainskin blathering on about things you don't understand.
posted by glider at 5:38 PM on August 10, 2005

Or, y'know, you could just drink yourself into brain damage. ;)

you back that take! Dain Bramage have no!

*picks nose, inserts results in ear*
posted by jonmc at 5:39 PM on August 10, 2005

"just another fearmongering plainskin blathering on about things you don't understand"

[looks at tummy sadly] No, I think I understand them a bit too well.

Forgive me for trying to be helpful. It was clearly naive of me to post such a warning, ask such questions, or reveal so much personal information, when what was really desired was pure validation for your choices.
posted by Asparagirl at 6:01 PM on August 10, 2005

Glider, it's plain that somebody who's walking around with a bunch of very visible and very painful wounds that he paid somebody to inflict because he likes pain and enjoys being disfigured is a masochist with no self-respect and more dollars than sense. It's almost tautological.

Someone who enjoys pain is masochistic: "enjoying pain" is what "masochism" means. That she apparently thinks this stuff is pretty shows an aesthetic deficiency; that she wants us to think it's it's pretty too shows mental deficiency. (I don't expect to be applauded if I yell "Bush is a traitor!" at a Republican fundraiser.) And that she paid good money for this makes a good argument for getting her a court-appointed conservator.

As far as having lots of money goes, President Bush is also very well-off: he even made money wrecking the Texas Rangers. So? Does that somehow erase everything that's wrong with him?

Note that while most in this thread say it's your right to do it if you want, the only people saying it's a good and beautiful thing are people already into it.
posted by davy at 6:07 PM on August 10, 2005

beth = Ignorant, angry, closed-minded plainskin.

So, you have your own slurs with which to denigrate those not in your coterie. How embarrassing for you.
posted by Scoo at 6:08 PM on August 10, 2005

And by the way Glider, I'm sad for you that you think so little of yourself that you do that -- and that you're unable to understand why it's not good. Plain enough?
posted by davy at 6:10 PM on August 10, 2005

Not sure exactly where you draw your "I am this stupid" line.

Don't know about beth, but it doesn't really matter whether it's conception or birth -- humans are all stupid, in a myriad amusing and fascinatingly different ways. This is just another example.

'fearmongering plainskin blathering': see, there's the Stupid right there. The old killer monkey tribalism rears up, and the best thing to do is laugh, and walk away.

Decorate yourselves any way you want to, kids. Sure, it's art. Of course. Long tradition, all that. It lets you feel that you have some measure of control over something, and that's good, and therapeutic. Helps you feel part of a community, which is important for us monkeys. Situates you in a kind of tradition in our ritual-bereft modern cultures. Damn fine. Might even bring you some recognition, if you're the artist as well as the canvas, and more power to you.

But I'm still going to laugh my ass off at you.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:23 PM on August 10, 2005

Asparagirl - I rather suspect that most people experimenting with heavy modification will be aware of the risk of keloid scarring. I find it sort of hard to imagine someone with no piercings, tattoos, or other modifications suddenly deciding to experiment with scarification... and if they've had any mods [mods done by a responsible artist, at least], they'll be aware of what kind of risks mods in general have. Certainly, the piercers that I go to [Tribal Ways, though their website seems to be down today] make sure that they go over the risks and aftercare for each piercing. They're also always happy to talk with people who are having problems and send them on to body mod-friendly doctors, if needed. Additionally, most people who have issues with keloids don't get the kind of grotesque out-of-control growth seen in the picture you linked to. Much more common are lumps and raised skin immediately around a piercing - not great, but nothing like skin "overflowing the original area by several inches."

Pretty much everyone in the body mod community believes in the importance of informed consent. glider's [in]famous BMEzine has a great deal of information on possible healing difficulties, results of badly done piercings, things like that. Good piercers, tattooists, and other body mod artists care a lot about hygiene and aftercare. They autoclave their equipment and use sterile jewelry, they often have some amount of health training along with training in piercing/tattooing/etc, they know which types of products can be used for which sorts of aftercare, they appraise their customers of the characteristics and risks of each mod, they're willing to help customers who're having difficulty with the healing process, and they can help customers contact a body-mod friendly doctor if necessary.

Thing is - that applies to every mod, from the sort of ear-piercings that some people give to their small children on up through scarification and even more extreme mods. If the body mod artist is skilled and responsible, and the customer is aware of the risks [as I certainly was[, what's the problem?
posted by ubersturm at 6:31 PM on August 10, 2005

Asparagirl, I'm sorry if my response comes off harshly, but you can only hear ignorant statements for so long before you tend toward a "fark you" response. Whether you are well meaning or not, sadly, you are ignorant.

davy, does someone who drives a car enjoy car accidents? Does someone who gets cosmetic surgery enjoy pain or anesthetia? I don't know which scenario is worse -- that you're trolling or that you're reallty this dumb... Which one is it?

wonderchicken, feel free to move on to making fun of musicians, artists, writers, or whatever else. It's all a big joke, perhaps, but I'd rather be the one telling it.
posted by glider at 6:36 PM on August 10, 2005

I guess that if I could somehow manipulate my (severe) psoriasis to resemble band logos, these folks would consider me cool!
posted by goofyfoot at 6:38 PM on August 10, 2005

I guess that if I could somehow manipulate my (severe) psoriasis to resemble band logos, these folks would consider me cool!

There's a set of acne scars on my cheekbone that resemble a constellation. I'm already cooler than you, square.
posted by jonmc at 6:40 PM on August 10, 2005

Keloid brand scar.

"Unashamed". Nicely put, says this plainskin.

glider: Chill on the antagonization and epithets, eh? It doesn't further the debate.
posted by loquacious at 6:40 PM on August 10, 2005

Damn, should have previewed. Thanks for apologizing, glider.
posted by loquacious at 6:41 PM on August 10, 2005

It's all a big joke, perhaps, but I'd rather be the one telling it.

And that's a positive attitude to have, sure 'nuff. An attitude tacked up on the church door with self-referential tribal epithets like 'plainskin', but a good attitude nonethless.

I guess, like goofyfoot, that the roccocco network of scars all over my body, mostly faded now, would still leave me another 'plainskin', because they weren't deliberately created.

But then, that opens up questions of what art is, and nobody ever likes those except the perenially quarrelsome.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:43 PM on August 10, 2005 [1 favorite]

I'll debate that for a dollar. But I'll need to see your scars and run extensive scientific and aesthetic tests. *brandishes day-glow micrometer and a digital camera*
posted by loquacious at 6:51 PM on August 10, 2005

Mayor Curley's hilarious. Even when he's talking to one of the world's foremost recognized experts on a topic, he still throws out the "You don't know anything! It's the internet!" line.

Classy.
posted by Jairus at 6:57 PM on August 10, 2005

I used to defend the mayor on occasion but I've become convinced that he's the demon spawn of an unholy marraige between lack of wit and lack of compassion.
posted by jonmc at 7:02 PM on August 10, 2005

davy, why do you think one has to have low self-esteem if they have had this done? Do you feel the same about tatooing? Scarification is outside the mainstream, sure, but tattooing is introducing a foreign substance into your body by way of a needle that makes you bleed and experience pain. How much different is it, really? Same with piercing. Should I seek therapy because I pierced my nipple? (oh no! I put a hole in me. I must hate myself!)
posted by chiababe at 7:32 PM on August 10, 2005

loquacious - I'm sitting in my estate in Mexico occasionally popping in to look at this forum. Antagonism of well-meaning bigots makes me laugh... I know, it's like poking monkeys in a cage with a stick, and I'm sorry, but amusing is amusing... I probably should just go back to my Tecate, but this is way too funny.
posted by glider at 7:39 PM on August 10, 2005

And hey, y'all kids with implanted magnets, don't you know bullshit "science" when you see it? Oh wait, I bet you're into astrology and "auras" and stuff too, huh.

Did glider say he had magnets in his fingers so for the same reason people wear those magnetic bracelets? Miraculous healing powers and all that? No. He said he had them so he could sense electromagnetic fields, and unless you're going to argue with Maxwell, Faraday, and a lot of people smarter than any of us, that's not bullshit science. It's clear that implanted magnets would, as glider says, enable one to gather information about the position and motion of ferromagnetic metals, to say nothing of actual magnets. And electric currents do induce magnetic fields, so it could even be possible to sense sufficiently strong electric currents through their associated magnetic fields.

I can understand your aversion to these kinds of modifications, and to be honest, I both find modifications on this level a bit disconcerting, and, as a personal preference, tend to find the unaltered body most attractive. But people aren't doing these things for my benefit; I respect the fact that reasonable people can come to differing conclusions; and I will defend the right of an informed, mentally capable adult (glider claims this covers most people who have these things done and, extrapolating from my admittedly limited experience with people who have more commonplace mods like small brands, large-diameter ear piercings, etc., I see no reason to doubt that) to make their own choices about their bodies. What's more, the very fact that I don't understand why people make such choices means I cannot and will not judge them for doing so.
posted by musicinmybrain at 7:41 PM on August 10, 2005

davy : "Glider, it's plain that somebody who's walking around with a bunch of very visible and very painful wounds that he paid somebody to inflict because he likes pain and enjoys being disfigured is a masochist with no self-respect and more dollars than sense."

Plain to you. Not plain to me, any more than a person with tattoes, an earing, or plastic surgery is a masochist with no self-respect and more dollars than sense. If you can put those all in the same category, though, then I think we're at the "logically consistent, but in disagreement" state, which (as you know) is fine by me. To be clear, if they do it because they like pain, then it is clear to me that they're a masochist. It isn't clear they have no self-respect. And some people do the scarring that aren't into pain, so your hypothetical example is only a subset of scarrers in the first place.

glider : "just another fearmongering plainskin blathering on about things you don't understand."

Well, sure, glider. Pretty much every request for information is getting answered by you with "that's nonsense", or "that's just the way it is". If someone isn't understanding, give some figures and explanation, don't just say "You're ignorant, so shut up". You have given some explanation (likelihood of person knowing about keloid scarring due to shaving cuts, possible usefulness of minor keloid scarring), but it always seems to come as an afterthought to "I have experience, so you shut up". You're not going to convince many people that way. Why don't you take the ubersturm approach, and actually write some sort of explanation that dispels the ignorance? It's like somebody sitting in front of a big bowl of pasta, complaining about how hungry they are, and not eating it. If someone's ignorance bothers you, educate them, don't just bitch about them being ignorant while refusing to fix that problem and putting the blame on them.

Oh, and thanks ubersturm.

davy : "That she apparently thinks this stuff is pretty shows an aesthetic deficiency; that she wants us to think it's it's pretty too shows mental deficiency."

Meh. Sounds like a load of "you say; she says" to me.

davy : "Note that while most in this thread say it's your right to do it if you want, the only people saying it's a good and beautiful thing are people already into it."

Well, duh. That's almost a tautology. "The only people who like it are the people who are into it". Yeah, and the only people who like Pink Floyd are the people who are into Pink Floyd.
posted by Bugbread at 8:01 PM on August 10, 2005

Incidentally, I hadn't heard the term "plainskin" before this, but I can't say I like it. I'm no more ashamed to have "plain skin" than someone with a lot of facial piercings would be to have jewelry on his face, yet being called "plainskin" makes me uncomfortable in the same way that being called "metalface" would make that hypothetical person uncomfortable.

Note that you have every right to make people feel uncomfortable in this way, but I fail to see why you would choose to exercise it.
posted by musicinmybrain at 8:13 PM on August 10, 2005

I dunno, I've always kinda liked the insults aimed at the majority. Dunno why. So far, I've been a cracker breeder. Now I can say I'm a plainskin cracker breeder.
posted by Bugbread at 8:20 PM on August 10, 2005

Cracking a beer sounds like a good idea. It's been an interesting thread, for sure.

Chill, glider, chill. MetaFilter's a little different. The vast majority of us respond better to strong debate and good arguments rather than simply busting out the monkey-poking stick and the poop catapults. Some don't though.
posted by loquacious at 8:27 PM on August 10, 2005

I know it's probably rude to chuckle at these kinds of things, but: NSFW
Gotta say I'd never have thought of that.

Also, I didn't realize one could get ones uvula pierced.
posted by Bugbread at 8:32 PM on August 10, 2005

There's a woman who lives by my favorite Starbucks who, I think, has every type of BM currently available. Lots of rings, ear stretchers, tats over both arms and the back, and now she also has weird infected-looking bumps on her chest which were obviously made by some mod artist (they're in a pattern).

So, in short -- don't be too quick to assume that this sort of thing will look good on you while deciding whether or not to go ahead with it.
posted by clevershark at 8:45 PM on August 10, 2005

glider, there's no comparison with fucking yourself up deliberately and driving a car -- unless you deliberately drive your car into a telephone pole because you enjoy pain and want to be disfigured. What is wrong with you that you thought that was a workable analogy?

chiababe, it's often a matter of severity and degree, of how "extreme" it is. I have two piercings in my left ear lobe (or had, it's been years since I put anything in there), but I do not have huge gashes hacked into my face. As for scars, I have plenty, acquired either in fights/attacks, accidents, or life-saving surgery, but I did not set out to get scarred. And intent is a major factor too: I certainly did not get punctured or disfigured because I enjoy pain or wanted "to release endorphins", as Mike Tyson did not take up boxing because he enjoyed being hurt or wanted to be brain-damaged (thus his choice of career counts as "stupid" but not "masochistic").

Oh, and bugbead: to rephrase, I've noticed nobody in this thread saying "those intentional scars are really attractive and I think it's so cool that people got them" except other people with such scars or those who want them. Conversely, I'm not much into French Impressionism but I don't tell people who buy Monets that they obviously hate themselves or they wouldn't do such a painful and disfiguring thing. (Sometimes I think you're "being obtuse" because you like to argue.)

And musicinmybrain, yes to what Stavros said.

And by the way, what is all this "tribal" shit? My personal-experience selection is limited because I've never been overseas and the foreign folks at the Youth Hostels (Aussies and Germans usually) were relatively mundane, but I can say that most of those Americans into "tribal" fashions and experiences are middle-class suburban-raised white people under 40 -- people whose lineages ain't been "tribal" in about 1000 years. It's cultural appropriation: you're not, say, Xhosa or Hopi or Maori, you're just ripping them off. Is being a yankee honky really that bad?
posted by davy at 8:54 PM on August 10, 2005

davy/all - I gots me some boozing to do, but let me sum it up in simple terms: this stuff makes me happy. I like it, and I'm a successful person in independent terms, as are most people I know into this stuff. So really, I don't particularly care if other people have a problem with it... I like it and from first hand experience I know it's "right"!!!!
posted by glider at 9:31 PM on August 10, 2005

I'm with Stavros. It reminds me of when I was in college and a friend invited me to a Pow-wow. My great-great grandmother was Mi'kmaq, but I have never felt any connection to any aboriginal culture. When I went to the Pow-wow I was struck by how many light-skinned, European-looking people were out there in tribal clothes dancing around.

I asked my friend and he said that the majority of people at this gathering were people who had not been raised on a reservation or in a tribal culture, but had some native ancestry. Apparently I had just as much claim to be in buckskins as many of the people there.

In the end, I simply felt a little sad for the participants who seemed to be desperately grasping for something that wasn't there -- and for all of us hominids. It seems like a natural human trait to yearn to belong to some tribe. People will create them if they aren't born and raised in them. Instead of Injuns and Pale Faces, suburbia has given us Plainskins and whatever the BM folks label themselves.

jonmc is right, the world is just one big high school cafeteria.
posted by Cassford at 9:36 PM on August 10, 2005

davy - I guess I missed the Halliburton sponsored class where they told me that driving a car was manditory. Sorry I grew up on a farm riding horses. Colour me luddite.

Well, back to drinking my beer. Hope you're having a good night... the evening's treating you well, muggle?
posted by glider at 9:52 PM on August 10, 2005

Mandatory, schmadatory. Where did I say i say I drive, let alone that everybody should? What are you talking about now?

By the way, in case anybody cares, I ain't no suburbanite. Never was, never could be; I'd be more comfortable in a trailer park.
posted by davy at 10:02 PM on August 10, 2005

I was morally neutral on all body modifications; however, this comment is so indescribably lame and stupid that I now think scarification should be a felony offense.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 10:03 PM on August 10, 2005

davy, enjoy the trailer park!

Optimus Chyme, enjoy the 404s!
posted by glider at 10:08 PM on August 10, 2005

ha ha ha, now "Optimus Chyme" is sending me email telling me I'm "gay"...
Oh now, perhaps I am a homosexual! That would explain it all!
posted by glider at 10:13 PM on August 10, 2005

That's not quite how it happened. But thanks for letting us know exactly what kind of person you are.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 10:19 PM on August 10, 2005

Again: HA HA HAH AH
Keep telling me I'm gay.
Maybe add "small and petty" if you'd like.
posted by glider at 10:22 PM on August 10, 2005

"Plainskin"? I choose not to tattoo or otherwise modify my body. Why spray graffiti on the Venus de Milo?
posted by postmodernmillie at 10:38 PM on August 10, 2005

It's OK by me if you don't choose to graduate.
posted by glider at 10:39 PM on August 10, 2005

Herrrrggghhhh.
Everybody just shut up. Shutttt uppppp.
People who want to scarrify themselves can, and should. People who don't want to cut themselves shouldn't. Nobody is better or worse because of it. If someone is actually mentally ill (and trust me, scarring because you're mentally ill is very much different from scarring for aesthetics; a loved one of mine didn't get that 6-inch long scar on her face because she was insane and also thought it would be cool, she did it because she thought she had spores in her face), they should get help. Glider probably knows more than most of us about this stuff. Asparagirl is right in that people should be aware that there could be complications. Major Curley should have been a blow job. "Plainskin" shouldn't be used as a derogative. Is that it? Can we quit the fucktardery, all?
posted by 235w103 at 10:43 PM on August 10, 2005

Change doesn't always equal progress. Namaste.
posted by postmodernmillie at 10:45 PM on August 10, 2005

Exactly!
People need to lighten up and let others lead their lives as makes them happy!

PS. I may be gay. Or small and petty. Or a coward driving a Porsche. Or something.
posted by glider at 10:45 PM on August 10, 2005

What 235w103 said.

For what it's worth, I was a member of the staff at ScarWars (not a practitioner), and I can tell you for a fact that the person whose cutting you saw on the site that says "pain is freedom" is not representative of the majority of the attendees at the event. For some, the pain is an essential part of the process, but most of them endure it as a very unpleasant part of obtaining the end result, which is a work of art on their skin.

I'm not speaking for all people who choose scarification, just the attendees at that event. The images on the ScarWars site are from the individual artists' portfolios, not the event. The event photos are in the gallery on BME that Shannon linked above.
posted by bedhead at 10:54 PM on August 10, 2005

Also, for Asparagirl: Every attendee of ScarWars who was getting work done was informed of the risks. In addition, all of them had tattoo work (some were heavily tattooed) and/or a number of piercings, so if they had a tendency towards excessive keloiding, it would have most likely shown up during their previous forays into body modification.
posted by bedhead at 11:13 PM on August 10, 2005

What 235w103 said thirded or fourthed or wherever it is at this point.
posted by kyrademon at 12:08 AM on August 11, 2005

OK, I read through this entire thread and there's still one thing I don't understand. Why would anyone who could afford a Porsche voluntarily drink Tecate?
posted by euphorb at 12:26 AM on August 11, 2005

Finally got around to viewing the site, and I can't say that scarification is something I'd choose to have done - honestly, to me, most of the designs at Scar Wars looked rather silly to begin with, and the med
ium didn't help [for example, that mohawked skull would've looked better as a tattoo, in my opinion, although it would've still been what I'd consider a dumb tattoo.] David Gillstrap's stuff was the only stuff I could imagine finding particularly aesthetically pleasing, and I still think I'd prefer it in ink. But I'd certainly hope that these people were doing it for themselves, not me, and if it makes them happy, well, good for them.

As for the "plainskin" thing - I like my piercings, and there are various other body mods I'd like to get in the future, but I see no reason to mock or act disdainful towards people who aren't into that kind of thing. If I'm willing to argue for my right to modify my body in a way that's meaningful to me, I should damn well be ready to support people who, having thought the matter over, decide that body mods aren't for them. Respect has to go both ways, and being an asshole doesn't help other people become more open-minded.

Oh, and davy - I've a few piercings, and it's certainly not because I enjoy pain. Nor is it because I hate myself. Rather, I like the modification that results, both for aesthetic reasons and more personal, emotional reasons. Pain's the means, not the end. Can't say that this is true for all people who get body mods, of course, but if you dismiss everyone who's ever gotten any kind of mod as a crazy self-hating masochist, I think you're barking up the wrong tree, man.
posted by ubersturm at 1:30 AM on August 11, 2005

"I'm a multimillionare... I'm sitting in my estate in Mexico"...

Nevermind the magnets and split tongue, now that makes me very upset. It's just wrong wrong wrong. Why you, and not me?!

*envy is freedom*
posted by funambulist at 2:34 AM on August 11, 2005

On a serious note, I can't believe anyone would actually consider this scarification thing as equal to self-harm as actual psychological disorder. Yeah ok I know I said I find this insane, but not literally... I mean, it makes me cringe and I do find it crazy and absurd and I don't think it looks cool, but it obviously has to be thought out and planned carefully, especially the more elaborate designs. People who harm themselves because of psychological problems do it in an outburst of anger and self-hatred, and it usually is not the only symptom of something being wrong. It is no laughing matter and it has nothing to do with aesthetics whatsoever. No matter how I find those aesthetics questionable myself, the people who do get these designs carved deliberately are obviously doing it because they like the result, not as a random masochist outlet for crazy emotions. Otherwise they wouldn't be getting those elaborate designs but just slashing their arms and legs at random...

Then of course they too could be having serious issues, but, well, so could anyone. Comments about committing people to hospital make me cringe even more than those pictures. Thankfully where I live people only get into a psychiatric hospital by personally signing a consent to treatment form, unless they've already done harm to someone else, and even then only after a trial establishing they actually did that harm...
posted by funambulist at 2:56 AM on August 11, 2005

And, what 235w103 said...
posted by funambulist at 3:00 AM on August 11, 2005

I used to defend the mayor on occasion but I've become convinced that he's the demon spawn of an unholy marraige between lack of wit and lack of compassion.

Why do you do that? I know, I know-- I should just ignore it because it's an insult coming from an noted expert on Butt Rock, but how's this for 'lack of wit'?:

"Oooh! A mention of feminism? Then iron my shirt and get me a beer, bitches! And if you get offended, it's because you're a PC thug!"

Yeah, you've got wit in spades.
posted by Mayor Curley at 3:30 AM on August 11, 2005

People who harm themselves because of psychological problems do it in an outburst of anger and self-hatred, and it usually is not the only symptom of something being wrong. It is no laughing matter and it has nothing to do with aesthetics whatsoever. No matter how I find those aesthetics questionable myself, the people who do get these designs carved deliberately are obviously doing it because they like the result, not as a random masochist outlet for crazy emotions. Otherwise they wouldn't be getting those elaborate designs but just slashing their arms and legs at random...

You are completely talking out your ass. Like the psychological definition of insanity is that insane people do stuff at random. Stop making stuff up on the spot and pretending that it's a valid definition.
posted by Mayor Curley at 3:34 AM on August 11, 2005

davy : "to rephrase, I've noticed nobody in this thread saying 'those intentional scars are really attractive and I think it's so cool that people got them' except other people with such scars or those who want them...(Sometimes I think you're 'being obtuse' because you like to argue.)"

This case of obtuseness is genuine, then, in that I just don't see it as odd at all that the people who say something is cool and beautiful are the people that want it. It seems, conversely, like a natural conclusion. (When it comes to intentional obtuseness: I do use that, but usually only when someone is making a very weak argument from sarcasm, where it's hard to determine what they actually believe or what their evidence is, except that they strongly disagree with someone or something. Instead of spending 10 minutes trying to guess exactly what and how they're opposed, I pretend to be totally obtuse in order to get them to put up or shut up. Hasn't happened in this thread, that I can remember.)

glider : "It's OK by me if you don't choose to graduate."

Huh. I would have thought that someone into body modification would be more understanding of the importance of individual choice and tastes when it comes to whether or not to modify. I'm a bit surprised that you consider choosing not to body modify to somehow be an inferior choice.

kyrademon : "What 235w103 said thirded or fourthed or wherever it is at this point."

What 235w103 said to whatever power we've reached.

Mayor Curley : "Stop making stuff up on the spot and pretending that it's a valid definition."

Well, now you probably get an idea of why people are gettin' all riled up at you: You find it annoying when they make shit up and state it as fact; they find it annoying when you make shit up and state it as fact.
posted by Bugbread at 4:13 AM on August 11, 2005

You find it annoying when they make shit up and state it as fact; they find it annoying when you make shit up and state it as fact.

I just went through my comments, and I can't figure out where I did this. But there's plenty of crap logic on the other side-- including the assertion (not from you, bugbread) that amassing a huge library of creepy photos and appearing on the cable channel that shows What Not To Wear makes you an irrefutable expert. Or that something is inherently good or noble because ancient people or tribal people do it.
posted by Mayor Curley at 4:28 AM on August 11, 2005

Yeah, well, that'll teach me to never again comment in a thread that's already been trolled to bits. *sigh*

Your honour and your majesty Major Curley, not that I particularly care for your own opinion, and it's not my problem if you can't be bothered to understand what you read, but for the record, you have spectacularly missed the point. I did no such thing as offer "definitions of insanity" based on random rather than carefully planned behaviour, I don't even believe in "definitions of insanity". I was merely trying to express what I personally view as the obvious difference between a person cutting their arms or legs or burning cigarettes in their ankles as a pathological form of behaviour, usually a symptom of self-hatred, depression, etc., and someone getting a tattoo-like scar from a professional in these body-modification thingies for purely aesthetic purposes. The difference is in everything, not just method and results, but the motivation itself, the purpose, the nature of the desire. The random vs. carefully planned is only one obvious visible aspect, but not the main one, and not a dividing line between non-insane and insane or disturbed and non-disturbed. (Besides, again, anyone could be midly to seriously psychologically disturbed, whatever they do or don't do with their skin, and I don't have an insanity/normality chart handy...)

I do wonder, though, if people who are literally equating the two things have ever known or seen someone actually harming themselves, as disturbed, obsessive behaviour linked to psychological problems. Of course I'm only speaking of what I personally observed, of course it can have different individual manifestations, but in my experience it usually is an impulsive, obsessive act done out of anger and self-hatred, or as a sort of masochist release where physical pain is an attempt to numb emotional pain and stuff like that, and there may be even a sort of pleasure in it; it is definitely not an attempt to "decorate" your body with geometric patterns just because you like how it looks -- which is something that, however weird and painful and disturbing to look at, perfectly rational and well-balanced people could decide to do. In itself, it's not really enough to say that person must be seriously psychologically disturbed, in actual psychiatric terms. They may be, or not. But what seems obvious to me is that they're not doing the same thing that pathological self-harmers with more or less serious psychological problems do.

So, I don't have to like or admire the practice of deliberate scarification for aesthetic purposes, or share that notion of aesthetics, or think it's a clever or cool thing to do, or want to do it myself, to actually notice that difference. That's all. Just a simple observation. Of course, due to your infinite wisdom and understanding of human nature, feel free to continue pouring your scorn anywhere you please. It's so charming.
posted by funambulist at 5:17 AM on August 11, 2005

bugbread, erm, I actually didn't "make up shit as fact", only stating what I believe is an obvious difference, now if you're implying that I'm not even allowed that, I'm going to take a bic razor, shave two inches of skin off my lower leg, get an infection and a horrible crust that will heal into a permanent scar, and all this pain will be on your head! ;)

(I actually did that once, accidentally, ahem...)
posted by funambulist at 5:30 AM on August 11, 2005

Oh, and regarding the Mayor's link, I was so not even thinking of Body Dismorphic Disorder, duh, or I would have called it that instead of self-harm. I was talking of this:

What is self-harm?
It is a term used to describe deliberately injuring yourself through various means, including cutting, poisoning and burning. The most common method of self-harm involve the repeated cutting of the skin. Other methods include scalding or scratching your body or ingesting small amounts of toxic substances.

Why do people self-harm?
It is widely accepted that self-harm is the result of profound emotional distress often related to traumas such as sexual abuse. Self-harm is used as a survival strategy, according to consultant psychiatrist Tim Kendall, co-director of the Royal College of Psychiatrists' national collaborating centre for mental health. It is a way for people to express unspeakable emotions and stave off impulses to commit suicide. However, research shows that people who self-harm at least once are 100 times more likely to commit suicide than those who never deliberately injure themselves.

Which fits what I have seen in people I know who did self-harm. And I have never heard any medical professional even compare that to getting tattooes and branding and scarring for decorative purposes.
posted by funambulist at 5:40 AM on August 11, 2005

And I have never heard any medical professional even compare that to getting tattooes and branding and scarring for decorative purposes.

You realize that the maiming linked to in the FPP was deliberate, right? As in "deliberately injuring yourself through various means, including cutting, poisoning and burning." Is it inherently saner because you're paying someone else to deliberately cut or burn you?
posted by Mayor Curley at 5:47 AM on August 11, 2005

MC, you just don't seem to get it, or you maybe you just like argument so much for argument's sake. Yes, of course it is deliberate, but do you believe that alone makes it a pathology to be treated? What about the differences in how it's done, why it's done, the difference between disorder with an obsessive, depressive, suicidal component, vs a rational decision, no matter how weird and crazy, to decorate one's body to one's own aesthetic standards? Come on...

You want to make me say I think it's totally cool and sensible to pay someone to carve your skin in patterns? I didn't say that, I don't think it is, I wouldn't do it, but if those who do it are happy with it and are not doing it because they hate themselves and want to die but because they do enjoy the aesthetic results, and are not causing hurt to anyone else in the process, then it doesn't really bother me at all, while I was very upset about a friend I cared for who self-harmed and was seriously disturbed and repeatedly attempted suicide, duh. Honestly, I also find the comparison very callous and insensitive towards people who actually suffer from that kind of psychological problems. If you had ever seen what that entailed, you wouldn't even dream of saying it's the same thing.

Do you seriously believe any therapists or psychiatrists should start treating people based only on the fact they pay someone to get tattoo-like scars? Go ahead and start a campaign, I just don't think you'd find any professional willing to do that.
posted by funambulist at 6:19 AM on August 11, 2005

This thread was fascinating to me, mostly because it invited 'glider' in and gosh I never thought I'd have direct interaction with the dude behind BMEZine. Having said that, there was a tragic sadness to this thread as I scrolled down as what was once interaction became petty fighting and namecalling. I am especially saddened that a lot of this came from glider, because as the thread started I thought "Gee, BM'er's are kind of weird, but maybe I'm being close minded. Huh, I can see that reasoning, well, I don't agree with what you do, but I dig that you have the right to do it." and as it progressed he became more, I don't know, unglued, and now I'm even less assured that hardcore BM'ers are in their right mind than I was when I started the thread.

and glider, for the record, I think it's awfully weird that you parade around your knowledge yet asparagirl who has keloids is "ignorant." Why can't you accept others if you are asking for acceptance yourself?

About the site: Creeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeepy!

plainskin and proud, '05
posted by cavalier at 6:23 AM on August 11, 2005

vs a rational decision...

See, I don't think that maiming yourself is ever rational.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:26 AM on August 11, 2005

And if you are so clueless about self-harm that you need to nitpick on quotes, then do pay attention to that "including cutting, poisoning and burning", as well as context, as well as "cutting" here meaning cutting for its own sake as, indeed, result of emotional distress, not an aesthetic practice. None of the research and treatment on self-harm include s tattoing, branding, or scarring for aesthetic reasons.

Here, you can educate yourself some more, if you care.
posted by funambulist at 6:29 AM on August 11, 2005

So it's done purely for aesthetic reasons? I stand corrected. I thought that the people doing it ascribed some sort of spiritual or at least deeper mental connection to the practice.

If it's purely aesthetic then I guess I just think it's ugly and it will look really, really dumb when the scarred people get old. Fortunately, they probably have high-risk lifestyles and don't plan to get old.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:44 AM on August 11, 2005

See, I don't think that maiming yourself is ever rational.

Agh, I don't think it's 'rational' as in a sensible thing to do either, but that alone doesn't make it pathological. And no matter what you or I or anyone else thinks, in itself scarring or branding for aesthetic purposes like for tattooing is not considered a pathological behaviour by medical professionals, and seeing as they normally don't tend to be shy about saying something or other is pathological, I'd say that's perhaps a clue it isn't...

If it's not something done out of self-hatred and emotional pain, if it's not forced upon a person, if it's not done in a moment of incoherence and rage, then it is a rational decision, to do something to attain a result one considers beautiful, and the fact others (me included) don't find it beautiful and don't find it sensible doesn't change that.
posted by funambulist at 6:47 AM on August 11, 2005

cavalier, as I said, her comments about severe keloid problems being an issue to this type of scarification are about as relevant as severe mental handicaps being an issue to university students. It's a strawman.

As to coming "unglued", it's called: getting bored with so much ignorance and moving into troll mode. Stupidity and closed mindedness can only be responded to rationally so many times in a single thread!!!
posted by glider at 7:08 AM on August 11, 2005

Stupidity and closed mindedness can only be responded to rationally so many times in a single thread!!!

As in so many cases, open-mindedness means "agreeing with me" and close-mindedness means "disagreeing with me."

There are no Open Minds, trashed-skin (or whatever you people call yourselves). Just already established positions. Like yours.
posted by Mayor Curley at 7:15 AM on August 11, 2005

Curley, open-mindedness in this case means pulling your head out of your ass far enough so you can see that you're responding due to personal bias rather than due to accurate interpretation of facts.
posted by glider at 7:32 AM on August 11, 2005

I guess my point is, man, if it's getting you P.O'd, why not go have a coke and a smile and not post anymore? I myself have a pretty resolute patience but once it's wasted I have a pretty volatile anger reserve too. So I know I have to pull back and either come in another way or not at all. Your last several comments have essentially consisted of "I'm rich" "I have an estate" "I have nice cars." I mean, geez, I know one or two yokels are saying "OOH YOU STRETCH YOUR SKIN YOU MUST LIVE IN A BASEMENT!" but I don't see that much of it here. It makes you sound more petulant than 'above it all' , which is the attitude I think you're trying to convey.

And I can see where you could get annoyed day in day out at people hassling you for your choices. Having said that, I don't see where shoving a stick into the red ant pile is gonna make the ants less interested in biting you.

I think humans are fascinating little critters and you make a good collection of some on your site. I think you bring interesting viewpoints. I just wished this discussion could have lasted longer ... I wish you had given at least some acknowledgement to Asparagirl's real life experience and not just dismissed her as ignorant. I wish, i wsh upon a star..
posted by cavalier at 7:38 AM on August 11, 2005

In my opinion, he was more than patient with Asparagirl. Explained why her concerns are not really a problem in his community - I'm sorry that she has to live with that keloid scar problem, but it's obvious who has more experience with the body mod community - if glider says it's not really an issue, I have to believe him over anecdotal evidence of one person and their family.
posted by agregoli at 7:44 AM on August 11, 2005

cavalier, with so many posts here amounting to "people who do this are stupid loser kids", I've got no problem with a response that shows that to be a fallacy... even if it makes me look like a dick.

Asparagirl's "real life" experience (which I mean no disrespect to other than in the context of this conversation) is irrelevant to this topic. As I said before, it would be like someone linking to an article about a PhD physics program and someone else saying "well, no one should do that because they might discover that they have a 60 IQ and fail miserable -- I should know, I have a 60 IQ!"
posted by glider at 7:56 AM on August 11, 2005

I don't have anything against people who want to alter their bodies in any way, but I do find rather offensive the idea that there are people out there who believe that "muggle" is a worthwhile or useful insult.

Dude, the thing about people who call people muggles in Harry Potter books? They're actually wizards. See the difference?

On the other hand, magnets in the fingers is a marvellous idea.
posted by tannhauser at 8:12 AM on August 11, 2005

tannhauser, surely you realize that if someone uses "muggle" in this context they're pulling your leg and testing your sense of humor? "Plainskin" is the same thing — it's a JOKE and a way to get people to think about their prejudices by flipping them around backwards.
posted by glider at 8:16 AM on August 11, 2005

I'M ATTACKING THE DARKNESS!

LIGHTNING BOLT! LIGHTNING BOLT!
posted by loquacious at 8:17 AM on August 11, 2005

As much as I hate to bait the troll, Mayor Curley, why are you lashing out so much at people who make different choices than you do? I understand that you don't want to get tattooed, pierced or scarred, and that's absolutely your right and personal choice. But why do you feel it's necessary to expend such energy hating people whose personal choice is different than yours?

Curley : If it's purely aesthetic then I guess I just think it's ugly and it will look really, really dumb when the scarred people get old. Fortunately, they probably have high-risk lifestyles and don't plan to get old.

For some people, it is purely aesthetic; for some, it has deeper meaning. Just as each person has their own reason for getting tattooed, pierced, wearing a certain hairstyle, etc., people who choose scarification have diverse reasons as well.

And FYI, they come from all walks of life, young and old, students and professionals, and yes, that sometimes includes lawyers and teachers. You are assuming that they have high-risk lifestyles, whereas in my personal experience, I have seen a higher concentration of straightedge (i.e., drink- and drug-free), vegan/vegetarian, and otherwise health-conscious people in the body modification community than I have in the general population.

Not everyone fits into your neat little mold.

On preview: glider has magical fingers!
posted by bedhead at 9:26 AM on August 11, 2005

Am I having sex yet?
posted by loquacious at 9:41 AM on August 11, 2005

For some reason 'plainskin' makes me think of lobster-red sunburnt English tourists in Greece...
posted by funambulist at 9:46 AM on August 11, 2005

loquacious: Yes.
posted by bedhead at 9:51 AM on August 11, 2005

Mayor Curley : "I just went through my comments, and I can't figure out where I did this." (in reference to making shit up and stating it as fact)

Ok, here's a few:

Mayor Curley : "Those people are so remarkably ill."

Unsupported, stated as fact.

Mayor Curley : "Seriously, kill yourself, cutters-- you're just going to do that eventually anyway when all your skin is gone and you can't get people to gawk anymore."

Unsupported, stated as fact.

Mayor Curley : "tolerance of mentally ill people publicly disfiguring themselves"

Implicitly states as fact that people who do this are mentally ill. Unsupported.

Mayor Curley : "You've already established that you think this is healthy, normal behavior that you would be comfortable seeing in a school teacher, doctor or airline pilot."

No-one had mentioned anything about school teachers, doctors, or airline pilots up until this comment.

Hope those jog your memory.

Mayor Curley : "But there's plenty of crap logic on the other side"

Well, yeah, that's my point: there's crap logic flying from both sides.

funambulist : "I actually didn't 'make up shit as fact', only stating what I believe is an obvious difference"

Not much, really, and your followup kind of retracts it, but you did state the following in such a way that comes across as "statement as fact" instead of "statement as opinion":

funambulist : "People who harm themselves because of psychological problems do it in an outburst of anger and self-hatred"

Continuing on...

Mayor Curley : "You realize that the maiming linked to in the FPP was deliberate, right? As in 'deliberately injuring yourself through various means, including cutting, poisoning and burning.' Is it inherently saner because you're paying someone else to deliberately cut or burn you?"

I have still to hear anyone make a cogent OR non-cogent explanation of how tattoing, ear piercing, or plastic surgery are fundamentally different. That's pretty unusual for MeFi: usually a non-cogent response will be offered at the least. Can someone who is opposed to scarring on the grounds that it is deliberate self-injury, and yet is not opposed to these other body modifications, provide an explanation of the difference?

Mayor Curley : "I don't think that maiming yourself is ever rational."

So, straight yes-or-no question: do you think that piercing your ear is ever rational? Followup question: Do you think that being irrational is necessarily bad? (i.e., if I draw a doodle on some paper of a cat playing a tuba, I have done something which is not, strictly speaking, rational. However, I doubt many people would say it is bad. You might, I just want to confirm.)

glider : "'Plainskin' is the same thing — it's a JOKE and a way to get people to think about their prejudices by flipping them around backwards."

Er...as a plainskin who isn't opposed to body modification by others, I have to say that, at least for me, it isn't very effective in its intended consequences. It didn't make me think much about my prejudices (don't have all that many about most things people do to their own bodies), but it did make me think "Hey, some of these people who argue about being true to yourself and your own body image are actually kinda insular jerks". Sure, maybe thinking that is my fault, and I'm to blame, but if the word is meant to get people like me to think about certain things, and it isn't successful...well, you might want to give it a looking-at. After all, if the only people it works on are people who are into BM, then it fails at its stated goal of getting people to think about their prejudices.

And, of course, it may just be me that the word didn't work for.

Anyway, thanks to loq and ubersturm (and probably a few others) for showing that body mod folks don't all turn to jerks when put under pressure like glider appears to (though I personally am suspecting it's just the Tecate, in which case: no harm, no foul, but you should probably avoid forums when drunk)
posted by Bugbread at 10:10 AM on August 11, 2005

Could the multimillionaire in Mexico send me some money for health care so I DON'T keep looking like the pictures in the front page link?

I'd love to be a plainskin. Thanks!
posted by goofyfoot at 10:13 AM on August 11, 2005

re: insular jerks

But as I'm sure you can see from Mayor Curley's (over the top) posts, that's how it feels from the other side as well... We (as in people who choose to look this way because it feels right to us for whatever reason and makes us happy) are constantly made to feel like unwelcome outsiders (and then often get told that that's somehow our fault or our decision, akin to "girls who dress slutty want to get raped").

Compare the ratio in this forum of people who are saying negative statements about the ideals, drives, and aesthetics at ScarWars to the ratio of people making positive statements... And how few people have said "hey, you're being a jerk" to the folks who say they think it looks gross or whatever... but if someone jokes that having plainskin is undesireable or lacking in some way, suddenly they're the jerk?
posted by glider at 10:19 AM on August 11, 2005

Damn. I put my hand through a dado blade the other week, neatly removing my epidermis precisely to the dermis. Didn't even bleed; just oozed a little.

If I hadn't treated the wound well, I could very well have ended up with a scarification tattoo!

Poor planning on my part, I guess.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:20 AM on August 11, 2005

And, btw, Mayor Curley has become quite boring as of late. The "Bill O'Reilly" schtick is done. Stick a fork in it.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:21 AM on August 11, 2005

Goofyfoot, move to BCS Mexico; healthcare is high quality and inexpensive here, there's almost no crime and everyone has a job and housing. West Hollywood can't be a cheap place to live...
posted by glider at 10:24 AM on August 11, 2005

I read several times here that only people who have mods or want them find this stuff beautiful. As a person with only one piercing in each ear (done when I was in 4th grade), I'd like to say I find MANY of these mods to be beautiful and awesome. Yet I have no desire to ever get a tattoo or more piercings, or scars.

If someone wants to create a work of art on their bodies, I say, go to it.
posted by agregoli at 10:36 AM on August 11, 2005

"Plainskin" is the same thing — it's a JOKE and a way to get people to think about their prejudices by flipping them around backwards.

I'm afraid I'm with Bugbear on this - if it is intended thus, it's not being used very competently. Besides which, it's pretty clear that soomebody with a prejudice against scarification or any other form of body modification is not going to be forced to think about their prejudices - they will simply think "Ah. The freak is being insulting. That handily confirms my prejudices".

As a technique, I'm afraid it doesn't work. Which is why, incidentally, I don't think "If I can challenge people's perceptions (of the body mod community), looking like a dick is a worthy exchange". Right here, you are representative of the body mod community, and therefore your dickishness is a means by which people can persuade thhemselves not to examine their own perceptions.

You started this exchange very well, I thought, and kept your temper commendably. But this "I have a porsche/I'm a multimillionaire/ I live in a mansion" stuff is just tacky. Mayor Curley and Davey, I think it's pretty clear, are beneath the contempt of most of the people contributing to this thread. Why are you seeking their level? Aspargirl may have been frustrating you, but to call somebody who is clearly very unhappy with extensive scarring that she does not wish to have a "plainskin" is, again, not likely to endear. What you are trying to communicate is getting lost in squabbles with a minority of contributors.

I'm afraid that ambassadors have to behave like ambassadors, and part of that is not responding to the people on the lawn waving placards in kind.
posted by tannhauser at 10:37 AM on August 11, 2005

tannhauser, ok, maybe I'm expecting too much of people when I assume that they'll examine their own actions when they're confronted with the actions of someone else that they don't like. Fair enough, I suppose you're right that a bigot isn't going to confront their own views in light of any hostility.

In terms of Porsche/etc comments, again, given that one of the biggest misconceptions is that the people doing these things are unstable unsuccessful people, I feel it's a valid response even if you think it's tacky. One of the sad truths about this world is that the way people are treated is affected more by their car than who they are. If I get pulled over doing 3 miles over the limit in a rental car, I'm yelled at at gunpoint. If I get pulled over doing 50 miles over the limit in my Porsche, THE POLICE APOLOGIZE TO ME. Seriously. It's a tacky world maybe, but I'm not its creator...

And in the case of Aspargirl she was responded to in level ways and she simply kept ignoring it and escalating and trying to justify her commentary in increasingly incorrect ways. And I'm not sure why she has the right to ignorantly insult and demean, and expect nothing in return?
posted by glider at 10:57 AM on August 11, 2005

It's probably a poor idea to post in a thread that's been trolled do death, but I didn't get a chance earlier...

First of all, as someone with minimal non-lobe piercings (only an industrial at this point), and no interest in getting any scarring done, I do find some of it aesthetically enjoyable to look at. Not the fresh ones - some of those images come close to making me feel physical pain - but some of the healed ones are interesting. So make that a second person who's admitted to liking them but not wanting to get them done.

To all the "they must be mentally ill" folks, give us one clear, supported reason that everyone who body mods must be, and perhaps we can have a discussion. Blanket hand-waving dismissals and assumptions don't ever do any good. There are so many reasons for people to do these things that I can't imagine how you could make such a claim. Yeah, it seems rather extreme, even to me, but I have no doubt that the majority of these people are sane and making informed choices, even if we disagree with them.

I understand where the knee-jerk response can come from. When I first saw BME, and saw articles about people who were willingly amputating healthy fingers, toes, limbs, and more, I thought the same thing - they must be mentally ill. This is because I'm WAY too attached to what my body can do to willing ever consider giving up any of it. If I was ever in an accident that cost me part of my body - even the tip of a finger - I'd probably be a horrible mess afterwards. (I freaked and cried after losing both big toe nails, even though they grew back) But that doesn't mean that someone who willingly does so has to be ill, just because they don't feel the same way. I'd like to believe that they spent time talking to a therapist about the decision first, because of the severity of what they were doing, but I'm certain some of them were fully aware of the decision and the consequences, and for whatever reasons, did it.

Can we please stop the trolling and at least try and post REASONS instead of knee-jerk judgements?

Finally, to glider: I appreciate having your perspective and your explanations here - they've been interesting and helpful, and the whole magnet thing sounds INSANELY cool. It's too bad you let the trolls get to you, as doing so can lower others' opinions of you - I know, I've done the same thing to myself on other web sites. But I have to say that it seemed it took most of the conversation here for anyone to properly address Asparagirl's point, and that was only done after I saw you claim it was irrelevant without any explanation other than you haven't seen it as a problem in your years of experience. I know, because I was waiting for that to be addressed in a manner than explained WHY it wasn't relevant, and was disappointed that I never saw you give one - and if you have, please, point me to it and I'll admit to being wrong. This was the only thing I saw said to address why it wasn't an issue in this entire thread.

(And thank you for BME - while I admit that when I first saw it, many years ago, I was more or less doing the "point and stare" thing in a way, that's all changed. Now I'm busy planning out piercings and tattoos of my own that I'm going to get. I stop by from time to time just to see what people are doing now...)
posted by evilangela at 11:39 AM on August 11, 2005

given that one of the biggest misconceptions is that the people doing these things are unstable unsuccessful people

That's not it at all. You were asked a valid question, which I paraphrase here: why do practictioners of scarification not worry about runaway keloids?

Rather than explain the situation from the standpoint of someone experienced and informed - and hopefully with medical data to back up the claim - your response instead was to call her a "fearmongering plainskin" who "blather[ed] on about things you don't understand."

When called on this bizarre turn of events, you responded with "I look cool in my Porsche, what do you drive, plainskin?"

When called out on that even more bizarre non-sequitur, you respond: "How large is your penis? Very big? Very small? About average?"

You are clearly an unimaginably insecure person who relies on family money and the comforts that come with it in order to feed your vanity and mask whatever discomfort it is you're hiding. Would anyone else but a spoiled, emotionally retarded rich kid talk the way you do? have the sense of entitlement that you do?

It's funny: most of the people I know with tats and big-ass piercings and such are extremely "normal" and successful, yet here we have the self-proclaimed father of the body-modification movement and you strike me - and many of us here, I'd imagine - as immature, petulant, and wholly unpleasant.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:42 AM on August 11, 2005

evilangela - Here for one...
posted by glider at 11:45 AM on August 11, 2005

And finally, your moment of zen:


posted by Optimus Chyme at 11:56 AM on August 11, 2005

"Did glider say he had magnets in his fingers so for the same reason people wear those magnetic bracelets? Miraculous healing powers and all that? No. He said he had them so he could sense electromagnetic fields"

Oh please, "sensing electromagnetic fields" through magnets in your fingers is pseudoscientific bullshit. If you mean unconsciously sensing these fields like we all do when we stand under a power pylon or like some do when a storm is coming, sure, but you don't need magnets in your fingers for that; if you mean the magnets in his fingers are analogous to Geordi's VISOR on "Start Trek: TNG" you've been watching too much Star Trek or something.

Someone who did well in physics could explain why; Cecil ain't gotten to this one yet (though I just asked).
posted by davy at 12:09 PM on August 11, 2005

Nice teeth...

bugbread: yeah ok it was a mix of opinions and facts about what pathological self-harm is about (see links), but because basically I have roughly the same opinion as you do on the topic of this thread and agree largely with what you've written so far, I don't see the point of being anal about how much in that statement was opinion and how much was fact. (deja-vu, eh?)
posted by funambulist at 12:16 PM on August 11, 2005

evilangela - Here for one...

So, has anyone tried adding flavor implants to body parts yet? Because I have a habit of sticking my foot in my mouth, and I'd prefer it taste better when I do so... Yeah, I was wrong...

And regarding that image, I can't help but wonder if there may be issues resulting from some of those piercings at a child of that age. Probably not, but might any of the holes get larger, for example, as he grows?
posted by evilangela at 12:16 PM on August 11, 2005

If you mean unconsciously sensing these fields like we all do when we stand under a power pylon or like some do when a storm is coming, sure, but you don't need magnets in your fingers for that; if you mean the magnets in his fingers are analogous to Geordi's VISOR on "Start Trek: TNG" you've been watching too much Star Trek or something.

I mean neither. I mean simply that a sufficiently strong electromagnetic field or proximity to a ferromagnetic metal will exert a force on the magnet, and glider will be able to feel that force. Simple as that. Basic physics. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear in my original post.
posted by musicinmybrain at 1:07 PM on August 11, 2005

And regarding that image, I can't help but wonder if there may be issues resulting from some of those piercings at a child of that age.

I've been staring at that picture ... and yes, it is indeed a child. I'm, uh, well, uh ... flabbergasted. WTF?
posted by ericb at 1:10 PM on August 11, 2005

ericb - photoshop.
posted by erebora at 1:32 PM on August 11, 2005

"I can't believe anyone would actually consider this scarification thing as equal to self-harm as actual psychological disorder."

Wow, you've seen the photos and kept track of this thread and STILL don't get it? Not that you disagree, but that you simply see how anybody can think that? I don't see how anybody can fail to get the argument, whether s/he agrees or not.

I've known admitted "pathological self-harmers" who cut words and shapes into themselves: it's still cutting, hurting, bleeding, most likely getting infected, and scarring. The only real difference between these "enthusiasts" and admitted "self-harmers" is that those who call it "art" and drag in references to "primitive, tribal" cultures are full of shit. Regardless of what the scars look like, it's self-mutilation when ANYBODY does it, even a Polynesian or a Hottentot.

Two "exotic" examples of "cutting" that come to mind are that the Aztecs used to gash themselves and slice their tongues and so on to propitiate the gods with their pain and blood, and every year the modern-day Shiites still "celebrate" a holiday where they gash their heads with swords and flay their backs with knife blades on chains to atone for their "ancestors'" abandonment of the Imam Husayn. From my many years of admittedly nonsystematic and nonscholarly but wide and frequent reading in anthropology and related subjects, I'd say that's the root of the whole thing: you think you've done something wrong and/or that you're a bad person so you hurt yourself to make up for it. (And I'll bet the Aztecs and the Shiites can be mighty proud of what "k3wl-looking" scars they get too.) That these things catch on among large numbers of people and even become cultural instititions strikes me as a perverse example of "The Madness of Crowds".

And note that I find the process of getting a piercing (which as I noted I did) and/or a tattoo (which I didn't) similarly icky but not nearly so much, and the result is (usually) nowhere near as icky to look at, in large part because you're supposed to notice the jewelry or the inked design instead of the wound -- whereas with cutting the design IS the wound. Most piercings involve small holes that are meant to heal quickly without scarring, and when I think of tattoos I think "macho follow-the-fad shit" instead of "obvious self-hatred" because tattoos too are meant to heal without scarring: remember that a tattoo is supposed to look permanently printed on, not painfully and bloodily engraved in living flesh with a broken bottle. Another point which I'll address more fully here is that until very recently I did not hear people talking about getting piercings and tattoos "to release endorphins" because the pain was not seen as the point, just an unwanted side-effect you have to put up with for a short while; that people see the pain as a GOOD thing, a way to "bring the mind back to the body and increase a person’s awareness of their physical self", points to flat-out masochism rather than (or at least as well as) "aesthetic enhancement" -- because as I pointed out "a need for pain" is what "masochism" means.

In closing (I'm getting tired of this thread), it's probably not a good idea for even non-masochists to pierce their tongues or other wet mucous membranes because of the health risks involved; when I got my earlobe pierced I tended it carefully and worried about infection, but I figured that if it did get humongously and incurably infected a surgeon could always remove my earlobe without impeding my functioning in any way except not being able to put a stud through it anymore -- but what do you do if your tongue, clitoral hood or uvula won't heal? (Said lack of earlobe would of course have been seen as an ugly reminder of what turned out to be a bad idea, by the way, not as anything "tribal" or "deep".)

And on preview, as for magnets in one's fingers, it would take an awfully strong electromagnetic force and/or awfully big magnets to produce even a very slight tickle. It's like with astrology there's no disputing that a person can be directly affected by the fields and forces emanating from three "heavenly bodies", namely the Earth, the Moon and the Sun, but to claim that your character is determined by where Pluto was when you were born is really stretching it too far in too many ways. But if the Straight Dope crew explains that I'm wrong and there really is something to this implanted-magnet business I'll reconsider -- and I'll come back here and say so.

Until then, Tecate's okay but I prefer Dos Equis Amber: both are pricey imports here, and if I'm going to pay all that I want something that does not taste like Schlitz. Bye-bye!
posted by davy at 1:54 PM on August 11, 2005

ericb - photoshop

Boy, I hope so.
posted by ericb at 1:56 PM on August 11, 2005

Wow, you've seen the photos and kept track of this thread and STILL don't get it? Not that you disagree, but that you simply see how anybody can think that? I don't see how anybody can fail to get the argument, whether s/he agrees or not.

I "fail to get the argument" because they just aren't the same - the intent is far different in those two situations.
posted by agregoli at 2:05 PM on August 11, 2005

Davy: "And on preview, as for magnets in one's fingers, it would take an awfully strong electromagnetic force and/or awfully big magnets to produce even a very slight tickle."


Did you even read the article? They talk about the magnetic fields that are able to be felt, and even what they feel like. Electric motor fields, other magnets, magnets embedded in applications like DC motors, magnetic fields from anti-theft devices. I bet you could 'feel' CRT tube fields, active speaker coils and all kinds of other fairly strong magnetic fields.

With training, or a stronger magnet, you could get the same effect by just holding a magnet and passing it through a field. But it wouldn't be as tactile or delicate because the magnet wouldn't be embedded right up against your tactile nerve endings. Having it embedded would make even very small movements amplified above and beyond what they'd be outside your skin.

This isn't crystal wand waving, aura reading, DNA aligning weirdo bullshit, this is a physical magnet implanted in a nerve-dense area that reacts and moves to magnetic fields and physically stimulates nerve endings.

Out of this whole thread, that's the one thing I'm selfishly taking away from this. It's so incredibly fucking awesome it makes my extropian brain do giddy puppy-like, tail-wagging backflips.

And there's your creative imaging exercise for the day: Think of a very excited, fat little puppy, wagging itself nearly in half to and fro like fish out of water. It's totally peeing everywhere in excitement.

Now imagine my fat, glistening, crenulated brain. With puppy legs and a hyperkinetically wagging tail. Doing backflips. Flapping tongue and googly eyes optional.
posted by loquacious at 2:34 PM on August 11, 2005

glider : "Compare the ratio in this forum of people who are saying negative statements about the ideals, drives, and aesthetics at ScarWars to the ratio of people making positive statements... And how few people have said 'hey, you're being a jerk' to the folks who say they think it looks gross or whatever... but if someone jokes that having plainskin is undesireable or lacking in some way, suddenly they're the jerk?"

There can be more than one jerk. It's not a zero-sum situation.

Also, davy, thanks for (finally) providing an explanation of why you see scarring as being fundamentally different than tattoing or piercing.
posted by Bugbread at 3:08 PM on August 11, 2005

davy - Sorry for my delayed reply. I spent the day snorkelling... Re: the magnets, you're quite incorrect. I can literally "touch" an EM field. The implantation of the magnets have moved EM vibration into the tactile range. If you're ever vacationing in La Paz or Cabo stop by and you can "test" me by having me locate the harddrive in your laptop if you'd like

Tecate here costs 11 peso for a 940 mL bottle...
posted by glider at 3:21 PM on August 11, 2005

"Also, davy, thanks for (finally) providing an explanation of why you see scarring as being fundamentally different than tattoing or piercing."

You mean that long-ass rambling essay helped? I thought it was redundant, that I was just over-elaborating the obvious. Montaigne I ain't, I guess.

Glider, the magnets thing I still don't get. How strong a sensation is it? Given that the magnets are so small, and that I learned as a kid that strength is size in Magnetland, are the magnets somehow "supercharged"? Can I get anything similar by carrying a magnet in my mouth and walking through the "anti-theft device"?
posted by davy at 6:33 PM on August 11, 2005

Not much experienced with rare earth magnets, eh?

"The 1/4" diameter by 1/10" thick magnet will lift a 2-1/2 lb block of steel." That's a fair hunk o' weight there.

What surprises me more about the magnet implants is that they aren't ripped out of the body by the force.

I have no tattoos and only accidental scars. Nonetheless, magnet implants interest heck out of me.

If I were to get a tat, it'd have to be a totem. Not one of old video games, but one with important events and people from my life.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:51 PM on August 11, 2005

Davy,

I'm going a bit out on a limb here, but, from what I remember, the fingertips are one of the most sensitive (especially in terms of separation) parts of the body (that is, specialized nerve receptors in different parts of the body detect different things. Some parts may be more sensitive to pain (i.e. provide stronger pain signals), but not necessarily granularity (i.e. you feel the pain as really strong, but aren't so good at determining whether it's one point of pain, two points of pain, and the like). Same goes for heat, touch, etc. (While we think of "touch" as a single sense (as opposed to taste, sight, hearing, etc.), the actual nerve receptors work for different purposes (i.e. pressure receptors, heat receptors, etc.)).

So putting a magnet in your mouth would be far less receptive, partly because your mouth is less sensitive (roll two grains of fine sand between your fingers: you can feel that they're two items. Roll two grains of fine sand around in your mouth: you will probably not feel it as two separate grains unless there's wide separation).

Add to that that with an implant, the motion is much closer to the nerve receptor (roll a grain of sand around with your fingers. Now put on some thing gloves, and try again. Now put on some thicker gloves). So even holding a magnet in your hand would provide less sensation than a magnet in your hand.

Add to that the fact that there is a greater amount of natural slippage when holding something than when something is bound in place (put your hand against something vibrating minutely. Then grab that item strongly).

So I can posit (no evidence, so I may be wrong, but it doesn't seem de facto illogical) that a magnet placed in close proximity to nerve endings in a part of the body with a high number of highly granular nerve endings, and held there pretty steadfastly, would be much more likely to detect magnetic fields than a magnet held loosely (relatively speaking) in an area of the body with fewer and less granular receptors and further away from those receptors.

That said, I'm a plainskin who doesn't have any desire to do any body modification, but I am now thinking it would be kind of neat to glue (not superglue, but something a bit more removable) some magnets to my fingertips to try this out. Even if it works, I wouldn't go inserting them into my skin, but I do think it would be pretty neat.

Also, regarding signal strength, it does mention in the article that it took a little while for the feeling to become apparent. That makes sense to me, as at first the body probably regards the signals as something of "noise", and after a while realizes that it isn't noise but actually correlative (perhaps akin to the way that you don't notice quiet sounds at first, but after a while in a quiet room you become accustomed and start noticing the sounds that you were discarding unconsciously earlier)
posted by Bugbread at 6:51 PM on August 11, 2005

five fresh fish : "Not one of old video games, but one with important events and people from my life."

That's actually a pretty nice tattoo. I especially like that they're in chronological order, and that the score on the Pong game is actually the date that the game came out.

Personally, if I had a tattoo, it would be a PacMan tattoo on the bottom of my big toe, because it's super easy to hide (I could go into any hot spring in Japan without fear of being kicked out), it's simple, it is a good design, its silly, and even if I decided I didn't particularly like it anymore, it wouldn't be a stinging burden of regret every time I looked in the mirror. Unfortunately, A) foot tattooes apparently don't take too well, B) they take a damn long time to heal, and C) I'm extremely comfortable with society's successes in pain avoidance. That is, I hate pain, because it hurts, and so I wouldn't get a tattoo (even if I used topical analgesics, it would hurt after they wore off during the slow healing process)
posted by Bugbread at 6:59 PM on August 11, 2005

davy; the magnets are sensitive enough that I can "feel" where the components of my laptop are from about an inch over my keyboard. I can feel transformers and so on from a distance, and when I go into stores I can tell if their security systems are on or not... etc...

I don't know if plainskin bugbread's idea of just supergluing magnets to the skin would entirely work or not, but it's not a bad idea and might be worth a try if you'd like to get an idea of whether this is for you or not without actually starting to incise your flesh.
posted by glider at 9:14 PM on August 11, 2005

Metafilter: There can be more than one jerk. It's not a zero-sum situation.
posted by tannhauser at 7:19 AM on August 12, 2005

bugbread: agreed, it's a very pretty tattoo. It's just that I'd find it very disappointing to discover that the best totem I can come up with would be one that commemorates wasting my time playing video games. Ugh.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:12 AM on August 12, 2005

Does anyone know of a place in Glasgow where I can get magnets fitted in my fingertips? I share loquacious' puppy-brained glee at the thought.
posted by jack_mo at 9:35 AM on August 12, 2005

I have scarification and I'm surprised that so many people had mean, closed-minded things to say.
Do the people who walk by me and look at my scars think the same things of me?
Most of the reactions I get are kind of "That's weird, but it looks beautiful."
posted by RosesAreRed at 1:28 PM on August 12, 2005

I'd like to say just one thing:

foreskins.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:03 PM on August 12, 2005

Ah, foreskins. I haven't had one since I was a baby, so I usually forget to include circumcision in my list of "mutilations". (I automatically include those mutilations practiced on girls in Third World countries as bad things though.) So since my "SO" brought it up in our discussion of this thread, let me confess here now that I'm conflicted on the subject of foreskin removal.

On the one hand, I believe those studies showing a link between foreskins and increased risk of STDs like HIV. (Regular washing probably lowers the risk somewhat too, but it can be difficult to practice dickhead cleansing.)

On the other hand, circumcision is lopping something off that strictly speaking doesn't have to go -- it's not like a ruptured spleen -- and I can understand men cursing the day their parents let that be done to them.

So I resolve that crushing moral dilemma this way: I managed to reach middle age without having any kids, I have no plans to have any kids (and luckily neither does she), and if I did have a son I'd leave the issue up to his later conscious choice.

As for me, I like my penis, I don't feel mutilated by the foreskin having been whacked off when I was a baby, and when I was busily practicing bisexuality I did have a slight preference for circumcised members. (The more you guys look like me at 21 the better your chances are.) So if y'all scarred folk want to hold this up as a Major Inconsistency go right ahead -- just realize that I did not, as an adult, pay somebody money to remove my foreskin, and it strikes me not as an aesthetic project but as a perhaps unnecessary prophylactic medical procedure.

And anyway, can y'all scarred ones say the same about the wounds and scars you've chosen to have done to you -- that it might reduce your risks of infections in and through the skin? Can you point to any studies showing any benefit to your physical health from that done?

And I must say that now I'm not sure having magnets implanted is such a horrible thing, as long as one can have them removed and let those wounds heal up -- as "decorative" scarifications don't. Rather it now strikes me as a goofy thing people do: assuming it really does produce an effect, it doesn't strike me as worth the bother and expense -- and I'm not sure I'd want to feel where some laptop's hard drive is anyway. (I'd rather wear a helmet to keep microwaves and mind-control rays away from my precious brain.)

So. I'd gotten tired of this thread, and only typed this because I felt an obligation to address the possible inconsistency of circumcision because five_fresh_fish_of_death reminded me of it. So I'll now depart this thread again, but not before reminding the public that if anybody wants me to even try to be 100% consistent about everything you're going to have to pay me for it.
posted by davy at 10:17 AM on August 13, 2005

Re davy's statement that "it can be difficult to practice dickhead cleansing", I don't know if I feel more sorry for your penis or your SO. It's not that difficult to keep your genitals clean!!!
posted by glider at 8:32 AM on August 14, 2005

I am glad I came back to read this thread.
posted by asok at 4:21 AM on August 15, 2005

A friend that's not a MeFi member reading this thread asked me to post this on his behalf:

Back scarification photo

"The above NSFW link is me. Yes, it hurt like you couldn't believe. No, I didn't do this to myself to feel pain, or because I'm a cutter, or because the physical response or the psychological notion of cutting has any significance to me. I got this (and more) because I wanted a Buddhist scar, for reasons that have nothing to do with anyone else but me."

"Call me sick, call me a freak, a psycho, nutcase, weirdo, etc. Call me whatever you want so that you can sleep easier tonight. Having a scar doesn't diminish ME, but putting down others simply because you're uncomfortable with them certainly diminishes YOU."

posted by glider at 2:34 PM on August 15, 2005