On tattoos and kiddie pools...
It has been a lovely week in St Louis- humid (of course) but in the high 80s as opposed to 90s. A lovely time to be outside. I took the girls to the pool yesterday since it was an early day for me and we could take advantage of the afternoon. The crowd at the Webster Groves pool is fairly standard for what I would expect of a community pool in a relatively affluent urban/suburban area- lots of well-toned soccer moms, suntanned teenagers, goofy kids, and a handful of unsteady toddlers in very well coordinated outfits. As one would also expect at a pool, there is a lot of exposed flesh.
In the kiddie pool there were a few dads that I would NOT have expected to see in this environment. Upper bodies and a few lower portions covered in tattoos (I am talking torso, neck, back, full arm and leg sleeves). One relatively large man had the word CONDEMNED across the back of his shoulders and DEVIANT across his chest, along with the many designs on the rest of his body (no, I did not look closely enough to see what those designs actually were). He was there with twin boys, maybe around 2 years old.
So, here's my question. Is that wierd? Inappropriate? Should he have worn a shirt? For those who don't know, I have tattoos of my own on my shoulder and back (two African symbols and a Celtic symbol). While they are covered by most clothing, they certainly show when I am wearing a bathing suit or particular tops. I like them, and I like showing them- they are "body art" after all, as well as a form of self-expression. So I certainly support the idea that tattoos are a social thing, an art form (when done well), and meant to be exposed. But I felt somewhat uncomfortable about THOSE tattoos in THAT space, and confess that I was glad Mariel can't read. And this discomfort gave me further discomfort, because then I felt like I was being too conservative about it and perhaps unfair and (gulp) even judgmental.
So what do YOU think?