Tattoos have always been seen negatively by a lot of people, what your are seeing now is probably the biggest acceptance of tattoos in modern history, at least in the last 60 odd years anyway.

Tattoos used to be considered part of a counterculture. It's probably a fair statement to say that for years, many people associated tattoos with gangs, bikers, and other groups that were thought to operate outside of the social center. Today, tattoos have gained wider social acceptance and more and more people, men and women alike, have them. People with tattoos work in a variety of industries and hold entry-level jobs as well as top executive positions. I believe tattoo's are not seen as negatively, and media might even have a positive influence on the image to a large extent.

While what you say in the description is true, it has been that way for a really long time now, and if anything, I think its getting better.

I don't really watch TV, but when its been on around me and on "reality tv" or cooking shows, I've noticed that an increasing amount of hosts and professionals are sporting tats. Additionally, so are many celebrities and athletes, some of whom are considered role models.

Fewer and fewer businesses have prohibitions against visible tats (and other body mods such as piercings), their shear presence has increased seemingly exponentially in the past decade or so, especially where I live (which happens to be a mildly conservative locality, btw). And the art is getting better with techniques that blow the old garde out of the water. All of this, the increasing presence in media and on the street, the decreasing corporate stigma towards them and the increasing artistic merit of them would all indicate to me that they are becoming much more accepted now than when my parents were young. Hell, even since I was a teenager, public acceptance has skyrocketed.

I don't think this is true any longer. A person with tattoos is not associated with criminals or bikers only but with the middle or upper class as well. The popularity of tattoos rose in the past years and they are widely spread in the media nowadays. Be it movies, ads, sports, toys,...you can find them everywhere, no matter what kind of influence. It is probably not the media that influences how the public sees people with visible body art but the person 'wearing' (or not wearing) this body art himself/herself. Of course there are stereotypes of some beings that still have to be portrayed a certain way to be authentic, stupid example (couldn't think of anything better): an angel or a flawless fairytale princess with tattoos would be rather awkward than trustworthy for most of us, unless it fits the whole concept. But some stereotypes can be easily adapted and portrayed in a new way without losing their credibility. The Samsung smart gear ad for example where only an arm with a tattoo and the smart gear was visible, suggesting it is the arm of a successful business man, works fine in regards to your topic. It definitely has a positive influence on the public's view.

I am pretty sure you are familiar with TV shows like L.A. Ink or Miami Ink or What-have-you Ink where they air the stories behind the tattoos people make in specific tattoo shops. And let me tell you something, I used to watch these shows with my grandmother. Yes, you read that right. We both liked the show and the reasons people chose to get those tattoos for. It was interesting to notice how many of them (who already had tattoos) can be so sensible and want to mark an event in their life that they can carry with them forever. Most of those people do it for themselves. Maybe they are afraid of letting go of someone who passed away, or they feel the need to be ‘protected’ by them at all times. It doesn't matter if it’s someone from their family or a beloved pet. These people can even be alive for what is worth. It’s often an emotional explanation as to why these people get their tattoos.

I brought up those shows because I believe it is a good example of media putting tattoo art in a positive light. And you would be surprised how many people who don’t have tattoos watch it. I, myself, love to watch it simply because I love how talented the artists are and perhaps because watching those shows fills in for the fact that I will never get a tattoo.

I am not sure where the whole rebel-story about people who are bearing tattoos began. I guess back in the days convicts were being tattooed with a number or whatever. Prostitutes were also tattooed at some point back in the medieval times. Perhaps the belief has been passed on in time and even if we don’t know where it comes from, we can’t help but associating it with the ‘bad guys’.

I don’t really think media still has a negative influence on the image of people with tattoos have. Think about Angelina Jolie. She has loads of it, but when you look at her she looks so sweet and elegant in her perfect Oscar dresses. As far as I know, there hasn’t been much criticism on how many tattoos she has, but rather the number of children she keeps on adopting. Am I right or what?

I think it may aid in some aspects, to form a negative image. All those bad biker boys with tattooed arms...But at the same time, this creates negativity with a certain type of people, not all. I think the body art alone is not enough to put a negative connotation, it is the type of person that wears it.

I believe mass media have a powerful influence on social opinions, regardless positive or negative. In the case of body art, media have, indeed, created a couple of stereotypes for people wearing tattoos and piercings. The first I can think of is the stereotype of the "bad boy" who drinks alcohol, smokes cigarettes, shows violence/rebellion , listens to rock/metal music and has hands covered with tattoos. This stereotype is mostly perceived as negative within our society. However, there are more stereotypes media have implanted in our heads that bring rather positive associations with people who have body art. Take, for instance, artists or people with extremely artistic personalities. Having tattoos can be attributed to being creative, authentic, open-minded, etc. In regards to stereotyping the image of people with body art i think media have brought both positive and negative associations. Moreover, you also need to consider current society as a living organism where different generations, cultures, subcultures , etc form various values and beliefs. Media do not influence them all in the same way. Within some demographics media might have a negative impact, and within others the impact can be positive.

Media have both a positive and negative influence on how the public perceives people with body art. Shows like Prison Break (to name one) show that in a different light.

"the greeks learnt tattooing from the persians. their woman were fascinated by the idea of tattoos as exotic beauty marks. the romans adopted tattooing from the greeks.

roman writers such as virgil, seneca, and galenus reported that many slaves and criminals were tattooed. a legal inscription from ephesus indicates that during the early

roman empire all slaves exported to asia were tattooed with the words ‘tax paid’." As you can see, in the past tatoos were also perceived in different ways by different people.

It could be perceived as part of fashion but as opposed to clothes, bags and shoes this is a more of a permanent mark and I think that is why people look at it more reluctantly. A lot of young people do it 'just because it's cool', without thinking they have to 'wear it'

for the rest of their lives.

Media can influence how the general public sees more groups of people (minorities etc) but I think the opinion is formed in time and from various sources.

I disagree that the media is the cause of a negative image regarding visible body art. Yes the media can influence's one opinion on a subject but visible body art has always been a image of rebelious subcultures. The negative image has emerged from that and in my opinion not from the media.

The media influences the public in both a negative as a positve way when it comes to body art. It depends on what message they want to send out. A person with tattoos can be the hot cool guy or like you mentioned; the bad guy. It's not all negative

I agree with some of the others here. The image of people with visible body art has changed. It used to be only the bad guys and the alternative people who had tattoos(we thought). However, nowadays it are not only the stereotypes that have tattoos, 'normal' people have tattoos as well. But I do think there is a difference between one or two tattoos, and a body 'full' of them..

I do think media has a huge influence but it is not necessarily a bad one. What is defined as a bad influence? I don't think if a character in a movie with tatoos is characterized as bad but they aren more projected as a powerful confident person. That is definitely influenced by the public's general perception of people with visible body art that has been around us over the last decades. It does have a lot of influence but I would not define it as a negative one.