Any opniions on the one I posted a few posts back?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
No, it is an issue of discussion because people shouldn’t and hopefully won’t forget just how much damage has been done to entire groups of people from mass killings of jews to lynchings in the southern US under many of these symbols. If that is “walking on egg shells”, I will continue to feel much more sorry for the lives lost as a result of that mentality than for the poor disadvantaged white men who sadly can’t get tattoo of a symbol marched under during many of those atrocities. Some would call it respect. What do you call it?[/quote]
Yes, but that is the recent history of ‘some’ of these symbols and it is in our recent memory. It is not the whole history of these symbols - take a look at the Swastika, it was basically a ‘good’ symbol up until Hitler bastardised it.
Is it a good thing that we continue to tread gently around these symbols - no, I dont think so, because it helps them retain the notoriety they have associated with evil acts. Imagine some new dictator started killing Christians under the symbol of a white dove? We’d be fucked then wouldn’t we?
What would I call respect? Well, I show my respect for people (of any race or belief) by treating them as I would like to be treated. I try not to judge them superficially. I judge/react to them by their actions and words, not on whether they have a tattoo symbol or an ugly moustache. If they have harsh words, they get harsh treatment. Simple.
I hate what has happened in the past, I am horrified that people have done evil things to others beyond description. I am not going to personally apologise for it though. The simplest way forward for me anyway, and to ensure the past doesn’t happen again, is to ‘do unto others as you would have done yourself’.
[quote]swerven wrote:
Yes, but that is the recent history of ‘some’ of these symbols and it is in our recent memory. It is not the whole history of these symbols - take a look at the Swastika, it was basically a ‘good’ symbol up until Hitler bastardised it. [/quote]
And he did such a great job of doing so that it will forever be remembered for the destruction that marched under it. No one is going to overlook a tragedy that horrific just to worry about what it “used to” stand for.
[quote]
Is it a good thing that we continue to tread gently around these symbols - no, I dont think so, because it helps them retain the notoriety they have associated with evil acts. Imagine some new dictator started killing Christians under the symbol of a white dove? We’d be fucked then wouldn’t we?[/quote]
If the same level of madness was suddenly associated with a Christian symbol, you can bet that the same rule would apply. I put no faith in icons to begin with.
That has nothing to do, however, with trying to act as if those symbols don’t mean anything negative. Simply because you don’t feel you had anything to do with the past, it doesn’t mean everyone else is going to forget what those symbols stand for as you walk around with them branded on your skin. It is a free country. Get whatever tattoo you want to get. Just don’t be surprised when those who have not forgotten take offense to it.
http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/1/1/1107992.1150242768758.Siciliy.bmp
I like the Horns of Odin symbol, but it does look like the Biohazard symbol. Are there symbols for Thor’s Hammer or Valhalla or some other norse gods/demigods that you are interested in???
My father and I are going to get our first tattoos together… we’re thinking something like this…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
And he did such a great job of doing so that it will forever be remembered for the destruction that marched under it. No one is going to overlook a tragedy that horrific just to worry about what it “used to” stand for.
[/quote]
We are still very close to this tragedy - relatively speaking. My point was that the horror of it will fade over time like countless others before it have.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
If the same level of madness was suddenly associated with a Christian symbol, you can bet that the same rule would apply. I put no faith in icons to begin with.
[/quote]
Then why would you take offence at a tattoo of one?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I have tattoos. The issue is not whether someone does or doesn’t have a tattoo or what they look like. It is specifically about certain symbols that have been adopted by those who preach hatred as their primary goal.
[/quote]
See my comment above. You are contradicting yourself a little here. If you put no faith in icons then why be offended at them (BTW I am not being a smartass, just unclear on your point here). I have tatts to although I am not sure what that proves.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
That has nothing to do, however, with trying to act as if those symbols don’t mean anything negative. Simply because you don’t feel you had anything to do with the past, it doesn’t mean everyone else is going to forget what those symbols stand for as you walk around with them branded on your skin. It is a free country. Get whatever tattoo you want to get. Just don’t be surprised when those who have not forgotten take offense to it.
[/quote]
I never said people should forget the past, but I do think they should move on in a positive way. For some, like Simon Weisenthal, that means a life devoted to tracking down the perpetrators. For others, like myself, it involves a resolve to treat everyone equally.
Yes, at this current period of history some of those symbols are primarily ‘negative’. But should public ingnorance of what a symbol actually stood for, thousands of years before it was bastardised, drive our current actions and thoughts. Ironically, it is perpetuating the same type of ignorance and lack of tolerance that has caused a lot of these problems in the first place.
And just to be clear, I would not get one of these tattoos anyway.
[quote]swerven wrote:
Then why would you take offence at a tattoo of one?[/quote]
Because the person wearing it is not an icon. The person wearing a symbol as popular as those used by Nazi Germany would have to be completely clueless to not understand what it means to others. A person wearing it would therefore be thought to hold similar views. This had to be explained to you? This isn’t a contradiction at all. You are trying too hard.
[quote]swerven wrote:
Yes, at this current period of history some of those symbols are primarily ‘negative’. But should public ingnorance of what a symbol actually stood for, thousands of years before it was bastardised, drive our current actions and thoughts. [/quote]
Unfortunately, public ignorance is exactly what drives most current actions and thoughts. Most people don’t remember what happened last year; don’t expect them to crack open a history book.
I agree with your sentiments on this matter, but in a practical sense, who would want to give mini history lessons to strangers every time they walked around in public explaining their tat’s origin, and that they are not racists?
Get the T-Nation tat, that is always cool.
[quote]Valar Morghulis wrote:
Any opniions on the one I posted a few posts back?[/quote]
What do those runes mean? Or would you get different ones?
Also, honestly, from a distance I think it’d look like a native American symbol. You’re probably not going for that look so I thought I’d bring it up to you.
I definately see what you’re aying about the Native American symbol… hmm, maybe I can get my tattoo-er to se ewhat he can do to make it less like that =P. Never really thought of that until you brought it up. And i would be changing the runes to make it how I want it, and mean something i would like it too.
Make this your tatto. Everyone will FREAK OUT!!!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
swerven wrote:
Then why would you take offence at a tattoo of one?
Because the person wearing it is not an icon. The person wearing a symbol as popular as those used by Nazi Germany would have to be completely clueless to not understand what it means to others. A person wearing it would therefore be thought to hold similar views. This had to be explained to you? This isn’t a contradiction at all. You are trying too hard.[/quote]
Yeh OK. So you are saying that its not possible for anyone else to value the symbols in different ways. Who is being completely clueless now?
Check out the list of cultures and religions that have used this symbol in a positive way - well over half the worlds population.
Maybe you should try a little harder.
This may be a slight hijack, but here is a picture of the tattoo I’m getting once I get up to a lean 210 or so. Obviously, there is way too much detail in this to make the entire thing a tattoo. So, I’m dummying down a lot of the colors and actually just having the guy with horns/wings crouching in front of the setting sun put on my shoulder.
Hopefully this gives you some ideas.
I just got a tatt.
Om, Aum, Ohm is a holy meditation symbol of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism (see graphic at top of page) with a profusion of esoteric and exoteric meanings. In modern usage Om means the Word, the ?parnava,? the eternal. Various accounts are given of its origin; one that it is the term of assent used by the gods, and probably an old contracted form of the Sanskirt word “evam” meaning “thus.” The laws of the “Manu” say that the word was formed by Brahma himself, who extracted the letters “a” “u” “m” from the “Vedas,” one from each; and they thus explain its mysterious power and sanctity. “Om” is also the name given by the Hindus to the spiritual sun, as opposed to “Sooruj,” the natural sun.
The word is Sanskrit. It is pronounced at the beginning and end of every lesson in the “Veda” and it is also the introductory word of the “Puranas.” It is said in the “Katha-Upanishad”: “Whoever knows this syllable obtains whatever he wishes.” This is because all words are said to be but various forms of the one sound, “om”, according to the ?Upanishads." It represents the divine and the power of God. It is the sound-symbol for the ultimate reality.
The three “mantras” of A, U, M also represent the outer, the inner and the superconscient states of consciousness and the waking, dream and deep sleep states respectively. And beyond these is the modeless fourth state (a-matra), which is the Self, according to Advaiata. Another way of saying this is that Om is immortal and inexhaustible. It is the symbolic expression of the creative spirit, the Word (with reference to the three component sounds), the three human conditions (waking, dreaming, and deep sleep), the three times of day (morning, midday, evening), and the three faculties (action, cognition, volition).
The Om is also often referred to as the sound of the Earth?creation…the heart of existence. To become one with the sound of the Om, through visual meditation and sounding of the vibration, allows one to become one with the source of all…to become "realized.
[quote]Aristocrat wrote:
This may be a slight hijack, but here is a picture of the tattoo I’m getting once I get up to a lean 210 or so. Obviously, there is way too much detail in this to make the entire thing a tattoo. So, I’m dummying down a lot of the colors and actually just having the guy with horns/wings crouching in front of the setting sun put on my shoulder.
Hopefully this gives you some ideas.[/quote]
Oops, I knew I forgot to attach the pic.
[quote]swerven wrote:
Yeh OK. So you are saying that its not possible for anyone else to value the symbols in different ways. Who is being completely clueless now?[/quote]
Who on planet Earth doesn’t know how the “swastika” is perceived by the majority of the people on the planet? We aren’t talking about obscure symbols that aren’t known. We are talking about symbols that were used as the defining beacon for movements of hate in our past. It doesn’t matter what value you personally place on a swastika if we are speaking in terms of how it will be perceived by others. It will offend someone because enough people were hurt or killed in the early part of the 20th century that the world knows it by those actions.
Oh, I think I’m doing just fine.
Heres something you might want to consider before getting that.
I have an aquaintance from spain who is also a tattooer and has all sorts of traditional tribal designs and things tattooed on him some of which were swaztikas on his fingers that were intertwined like on a japanese kimono. This particular guy by no means even resembles a white person, and the tattoos are hard to make out if you dont know what you’re looking at. This spanish, cholo looking guy with (basically hidden) swaztikas with absolutely no political meaning, almost got killed by getting his head kicked in by some arab guys in the south of spain who happened to recognize them… This guys is very heavily tattooed and this is the first thing that these guys noticed about him and almost beat him to death… think about how that design may look on you… There are plenty of other tattoos that may be better for you…
[quote]PGJ wrote:
I wouldn’t get ANYTHING that even RESEMBLES ANYTHING associated with NAZI Germany or arian/nordic/germanic markings. It might be completely innocent, but you never know how some people will react. You could end up in a fight, ganged up on, or spend a lot of time explaining.
And NEVER get an arm-band tattoo. They were cool about 10 years ago, now they’re just cheesie. [/quote]
In fact, if you’re German, never mention patriotism, and dye your hair brown if you are blond.
Actually, being American is offensive to some Arabs. Don’t ever travel on air plans, and avoid all Arabs. And wear a Canadian Flag on your backpack if you must travel.
Or you could just grow some testicles. Whatever works for you.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Who on planet Earth doesn’t know how the “swastika” is perceived by the majority of the people on the planet?
[/quote]
I told you in my previous post - probably about 3 billion people in central/western asia for starters!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
We aren’t talking about obscure symbols that aren’t known. We are talking about symbols that were used as the defining beacon for movements of hate in our past.
[/quote]
Symbols that were mis-used for a relatively brief period of time.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
It doesn’t matter what value you personally place on a swastika if we are speaking in terms of how it will be perceived by others. It will offend someone because enough people were hurt or killed in the early part of the 20th century that the world knows it by those actions.
[/quote]
So perception should overide truth or knowledge? People once perceived the world was flat and were offended by those that suggested it was actuall round.
I am intrigued why has so much emphasis been placed on a symbol as the essence of the evil that occured? Why not create a new symbol? Why are people not still offended by Germany and Germans? This is as logical as remaining offended by a symbol used wrongly by a madman.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Oh, I think I’m doing just fine.
[/quote]
I know you think you are 
[quote]swerven wrote:
So perception should overide truth or knowledge? People once perceived the world was flat and were offended by those that suggested it was actuall round.[/quote]
The TRUTH is that this symbol (for the 5th time) was marched under by Nazi Germany. Some of those people who went through that are still alive. This isn’t some minor consideration and regardless of what it was used for hundreds or even thousands of years ago, what it stood for when that much harm was caused it what still hurts people. You can ignore this if you wish. It is your body. Just don’t expect other people to agree with you. That is the truth.
[quote]
I am intrigued why has so much emphasis been placed on a symbol as the essence of the evil that occured? Why not create a new symbol? Why are people not still offended by Germany and Germans? This is as logical as remaining offended by a symbol used wrongly by a madman. [/quote]
That isn’t logical at all. You are basically saying that bigotry is the same as not liking a symbol used blatantly by racists and murderers. If someone doesn’t like “Germans”, they are bigots because not all Germans are the same. If someone views a symbol used by racists and murderers as standing for what those people believed in, they are not only acknowledging history, but they are also acknowledging the fact that the same symbol is used today by racists. How ignorant would someone have to be to just ignore that?
Maybe you should take notes.