A Mum's Viewpoint on Tattoos

Perhaps not the most amusing. However, with the (possible) advantage of a number of years more experience of life than those posting, I do have my opinion. I have yet to meet anyone (of my generation or yours) who doesn't regret a tattoo they had done in their formative years. As for 'expressions of personal identity' (LOL)......I reckon I'd prefer the 'I was so drunk I couldn't remember what I asked the tatooist for!'

My younger son quite liked a few tats that a few 'mates' had when they were in their teens. However, he would never have had one himself as he knew I am not keen on them. Now at 21, he tells me that already a couple of them regret them!

The mother in the Guardian article does seem a bit OTT....

Yes, she recognised it was his body when she was doing her research. I had hoped this was a turning point in the article that would lead to her gradual acceptance of his tattoo. Many parents hate the fact their kids get tattoos, and that's fine- it's perfectly understandable. What everyone seems to have a problem with is that she refused to speak to her son for 3 days, thinks it would have been better if he'd got a girl pregnant or lost an arm in a car crash, and now claims her son is a stranger and she doesn't know him anymore.

That last one, in particular, is pretty awful. I have a tattoo and I can tell by my grandparent's reactions they hated it. If they had then treated me differently, as this woman says she will to her son, and said they didn't know who I was anymore, I would find it extremely hurtful. I am still the same person I was before I got the tattoo, and so is this woman's son.

You have a good point there, and I agree that it sounds awful when she says that she doesn't know her son any more.

But put yourself in the mother's shoes. Look at things from her perspective. I'm willing to bet that you don't have an adult son, and as a matter of fact, neither do I. But that doesn't mean that we can't at least try to understand her line of thought.

She may have sacrificed a lot of what she wanted, just for him. She may have worked tirelessly, like most parents do, to save up money to feed him, clothe him, give him a good education. But when he grew up into an adult, his interactions with his mother must have changed, as all children must do, as they develop from child to teenager to adult.

And on top of this, her son suddenly does something that she feels strongly against, without asking for her opinion or even telling her beforehand. He goes behind her back to do it, and curtly tells her to deal with it. Wouldn't she be a tad overwhelmed by this?

I'm happy that your grandparents were able to accept your tattoo, and as I've repeated multiple times, I have nothing against tattoos either. But the point that I've been trying to drive home is that to the mother, it was more than a tattoo to her - it must have some different kind of significance.

I think you'll find there are many many things you can buy with £150.

Perhaps not the most amusing. However, with the (possible) advantage of a number of years more experience of life than those posting, I do have my opinion. I have yet to meet anyone (of my generation or yours) who doesn't regret a tattoo they had done in their formative years. As for 'expressions of personal identity' (LOL)......I reckon I'd prefer the 'I was so drunk I couldn't remember what I asked the tatooist for!'

My younger son quite liked a few tats that a few 'mates' had when they were in their teens. However, he would never have had one himself as he knew I am not keen on them. Now at 21, he tells me that already a couple of them regret them!

The mother in the Guardian article does seem a bit OTT....

You have a good point there, and I agree that it sounds awful when she says that she doesn't know her son any more.

But put yourself in the mother's shoes. Look at things from her perspective. I'm willing to bet that you don't have an adult son, and as a matter of fact, neither do I. But that doesn't mean that we can't at least try to understand her line of thought.

She may have sacrificed a lot of what she wanted, just for him. She may have worked tirelessly, like most parents do, to save up money to feed him, clothe him, give him a good education. But when he grew up into an adult, his interactions with his mother must have changed, as all children must do, as they develop from child to teenager to adult.

And on top of this, her son suddenly does something that she feels strongly against, without asking for her opinion or even telling her beforehand. He goes behind her back to do it, and curtly tells her afterwards to deal with it. Wouldn't she be a tad overwhelmed by this?

I'm happy that your grandparents were able to accept your tattoo, and as I've repeated multiple times, I have nothing against tattoos either. But the point that I've been trying to drive home is that to the mother, it was more than a tattoo to her - it must have some different kind of significance.

Very well said. The bit in bold is pretty much word for words what I was going to say.

A tad overwhelmed =/= disowning your son. Her reaction isn't proportionate to what happened, and it just makes her look pathetic.

You have a good point there, and I agree that it sounds awful when she says that she doesn't know her son any more.

But put yourself in the mother's shoes. Look at things from her perspective. I'm willing to bet that you don't have an adult son, and as a matter of fact, neither do I. But that doesn't mean that we can't at least try to understand her line of thought.

She may have sacrificed a lot of what she wanted, just for him. She may have worked tirelessly, like most parents do, to save up money to feed him, clothe him, give him a good education. But when he grew up into an adult, his interactions with his mother must have changed, as all children must do, as they develop from child to teenager to adult.

And on top of this, her son suddenly does something that she feels strongly against, without asking for her opinion or even telling her beforehand. He goes behind her back to do it, and curtly tells her afterwards to deal with it. Wouldn't she be a tad overwhelmed by this?

At least, that's what I make of it. I'm not saying what she did was right, but I can follow the line of reasoning leading to her actions.

I'm happy that your grandparents were able to accept your tattoo, and as I've repeated multiple times, I have nothing against tattoos either. But the point that I've been trying to drive home is that to the mother, it was more than a tattoo to her - it must have some different kind of significance.

Perhaps that may be the case for you. However, I know several people who don't regret their tattoos many years later, so there are definitely people out there, even if you don't know them.

That may be your preference, but to mock someone for genuinely feeling that way about their tattoo is a bit ignorant to be honest.

A bit OTT? Effectively disowning your son for making a decision about his own body is a bit more than over the top, would you disown your own son for the same thing? I'd like to think not!

It's not exactly a huge amount of money, not enough to warrant that response.

You have a good point there, and I agree that it sounds awful when she says that she doesn't know her son any more.

But put yourself in the mother's shoes. Look at things from her perspective. I'm willing to bet that you don't have an adult son, and as a matter of fact, neither do I. But that doesn't mean that we can't at least try to understand her line of thought.

She may have sacrificed a lot of what she wanted, just for him. She may have worked tirelessly, like most parents do, to save up money to feed him, clothe him, give him a good education. But when he grew up into an adult, his interactions with his mother must have changed, as all children must do, as they develop from child to teenager to adult.

And on top of this, her son suddenly does something that she feels strongly against, without asking for her opinion or even telling her beforehand. He goes behind her back to do it, and curtly tells her afterwards to deal with it. Wouldn't she be a tad overwhelmed by this?

At least, that's what I make of it. I'm not saying what she did was right, but I can follow the line of reasoning leading to her actions.

I'm happy that your grandparents were able to accept your tattoo, and as I've repeated multiple times, I have nothing against tattoos either. But the point that I've been trying to drive home is that to the mother, it was more than a tattoo to her - it must have some different kind of significance.

I can completely understand that she feels betrayed that he would get a tattoo without telling her. She has a right to feel upset. However, what I do not agree with is that she has then decided it would have been better he had lost an arm, rather than got inked. I think she has overreacted and she needs to calm down quite a bit before she says anything more to her son that could upset him. I believe in time she'll regret telling him that she won't ever treat him the same way.

Overwhelmed perhaps, refuse to talk to your son for three days, and then effectively disown him, and claim that him losing an arm in an accident would be better than a tattoo? I think not.

She didn't disown her son, did she?

I was under the impression that the phrase "took a meat cleaver to my apron strings" was simply a metaphor that she felt that her son didn't need her anymore.

"You couldn't have done anything to hurt me more."

...He says, "I'm still the same person."

I look at him, sitting there, my 21-year-old son. I feel I'm being interviewed for a job I don't even want. I say, "But you're not. You're different. I will never look at you in the same way again. It's a visceral feeling. Maybe because I'm your mother. All those years of looking after your body – taking you to the dentist and making you drink milk and worrying about green leafy vegetables and sunscreen and cancer from mobile phones. And then you let some stranger inject ink under your skin. To me, it seems like self-mutilation. If you'd lost your arm in a car accident, I would have understood. I would have done everything to make you feel better. But this – this is desecration. And I hate it."

Yeah, this kind of implies that she is thinking about disowning him - 'I will never look at you the same way again' and that he apparently isn't the same person.

That is not 'a tad overwhelmed' as you put it.

I would rather my mum not talk to me in three days and calm down instead of exchanging heated words with me.
Effectively disown? They still talk to each other. The fact that his mother is wary of him is understandable. The son knew how much his mother disliked tattoos and he got it done without even talking to her about it.
She did not say that.

"You couldn't have done anything to hurt me more."

...He says, "I'm still the same person."

I look at him, sitting there, my 21-year-old son. I feel I'm being interviewed for a job I don't even want. I say, "But you're not. You're different. I will never look at you in the same way again. It's a visceral feeling. Maybe because I'm your mother. All those years of looking after your body – taking you to the dentist and making you drink milk and worrying about green leafy vegetables and sunscreen and cancer from mobile phones. And then you let some stranger inject ink under your skin. To me, it seems like self-mutilation. If you'd lost your arm in a car accident, I would have understood. I would have done everything to make you feel better. But this – this is desecration. And I hate it."

Yeah, this kind of implies that she is thinking about disowning him - 'I will never look at you the same way again' and that he apparently isn't the same person.

That is not 'a tad overwhelmed' as you put it.