Baldy wrote:Grizalltheway wrote:
Okay Badly. Feel free to explain to us densies what the fuck the point of any of your posts ITT might be.
kalm made the ridiculous statement insinuating that there was no difference between a tattoo and a suit.
You can take off a suit. You can change a suit. You can buy a new suit to replace an old suit.
Unless you want to undergo extremely expensive, time consuming, and painful medical procedures, you are stuck with a tattoo...the same tattoo 4 lyfe. You are stuck with that one bad decision (for 25% of the people) forever.

Yes, thank you! I
literally didn't realize that you can take off a suit, change a suit, replace a suit whereas a tattoo is forever!
How could you be smart enough to go to an Ivy League school without "under represented minority" preference and stupid enough to tattoo yourself like that and make yourself look like that? Paradox.
To help you out a little, I was counter trolling this reply.
And even Flaggy knew what why I was doing.
What's honestly the difference between that and a suit and tie?
I agree. Both are choices. So both are open to praise and/or criticism.
You (and maybe JSO although this might have been a subtle troll) like conformity. It makes you feel good. Senators are supposed to look the part. Dress for success. Get off my porch!
Some people get tats in memory of loved ones. Some people get them for no reason and change them like hairstyles.
Mrs. Kalm's grandpa was a sailor on a Destroyer in WWII. Picked up a couple of these for crossing the equator and travelling a certain amount of miles. He was pretty damn proud of them and liked to show them off, even in his 70's.
What a terrible decision. They
should be judged...
