>>2321431Defending is reactionary, it doesn't require motive. You're attacking, you require initiative and motive. Therefore you must have a reason to come here and attack what is likely an abstract construct. You will not convince anyone as well, since /pol/ largely shares your view. So what is your reasoning? There's only one reason someone shits on others and presents himself as better. Because he needs to. Because his own life is pathetic. Who knows, maybe you're a virgin stemlord with no real self-worth, maybe it's something lesser. But the reason remains the same.
>Read up at all the points I don't need to parrotI don't particularly give a shit about your points, since your opinion will never matter in life. Objectively, if you spend your time talking about how bad tattoos are, you are not the person who will ever matter in this world.
>Tattoos often mean lower class shitskins like youYour assumption I'm lower class is interesting. Based on what?
>Enough said, try hard.Don't wiggle out of this, faggot, learning to face things is how you can get stronger and your life can get meaning. I'm sorry you had a shit father, but what can you do.
>>2321433>Tattoos are the working class stampInteresting how office drones and low-ranking STEM workers are the ones who shun tattoos and talk about their invalidity then. Why is the argument against tattoos "you won't get a job" if they're for the working class? Wouldn't that then automatically mean that being AGAINST tattoos is a working class thing, since tattoos are said to exclude you from the working class?
>If you have a tattoo you're also more than likely to cave in to peer pressure more or be influenced heavily by social media.There's tattoos and tattoos. You are correct, for one type of tattoos - the fashion tattoos. I.e. those that look good, serve to fill in a hole in your identity, to show off or whatever.
