Pick and mix

Today we are raising a brimming tankard in honour of the rambling Irish Grandad, who has performed the sterling public service of putting online the archives of the Raccoon Arms (see sidebar). Grandad, your very good health!

Meanwhile, I've been doing a spot of housekeeping here in the Tavern, and, among the dust and cobwebs, I found an assortment of notes which never made it online.

For a variety of reasons, these draft (or daft) fragments either resisted further development or proved too insubstantial to make a reasonable post. Rather than throw the whole lot out with the rubbish, I thought I'd offer a few of them for your edification and amusement this Bank Holiday weekend so, in no particular order, here we go:

-------------------

Every now and then you hear of a demise so bizarre that you can imagine St Peter at the Pearly gates, quill in hand, pausing and looking up from his list in utter amazement: "You did what?"

In keeping with its chosen role as purveyor of exotic and salacious news stories from around the globe, the Telegraph last week brought us the tale of a Michigan woman who was admitted to hospital with a fatal gunshot wound to the eye.

St. Joseph Public Safety Department Director Mark Clapp told the Kalamazoo Gazette 55-year-old Christina Bond was “having trouble adjusting her bra holster and could not get it to fit the way she wanted it to.” 

In an attempt to sort out the problem, she apparently bent forward to have a closer look, whereupon the gun went off; although 55 is probably rather too late in life to qualify for a Darwin Award, this untimely departure surely deserves some kind of honourable mention.

-------------------

With apologies to readers of a sensitive disposition:

The Clacton Gazette surpassed itself this week with the tale of a couple observed in flagrante delicto on Martello Beach in broad daylight amid the crowds of promenading holidaymakers.

For reasons known only to himself, one witness decided to film their antics and, presumably, share the result with the local paper, leading to this exquisite quote from the article:

The couple’s identity is unknown. Their faces can’t be seen on the video but the woman is believed to have a bulldog tattoo on her back.
 

--------------------

And finally, this one just defied any attempt to make sensible use of it but remains one of my favourite headlines:

Giant gorilla made from 40,000 spoons proves popular at Llangollen Eisteddfod

They that go down to the sea in blow-up dinghies

As the coastal Darwin Award Hopeful season continues, we have the slightly baffling story of two would-be mariners picked up by the RNLI off the Somerset coast.

The lifeboat crew, scrambled from work when the Coastguard spotted the child-sized boat drifting a mile out to sea, arrived to find the leaking 5ft dinghy occupied by two full-grown men 'oblivious that they were out of control and at the mercy of the very strong tides'.

The intrepid amateur seafarers had been at sea for three hours already, having drastically underestimated the distance to their intended destination of Steep Holm, a rocky island five miles offshore in the Bristol Channel.

What they expected to do there is, it has to be said, something of a mystery:

It is a nature reserve and a Site of Special Scientific Interest famed for its beautiful May-flowering wild peony. It is home to the remains of a 12th century Augustinian priory.

While it also boasts the remnants of wartime military installations and a Victorian barracks (now a 'Visitor and Education/Exhibition Centre'), it is hard to see this plethora of aesthetic and intellectual stimulation appealing to the bare-chested duo - one sporting abundant tattoos and a back-to-front baseball cap - pictured in the RNLI report.

Even if I am wrong and their motives were of the loftiest, they chose an odd way to go about it. Regular day trips are on offer and, given that Steep Holm is 'in the middle of a busy shipping channel, isolated by brisk tidal currents and a difficult landing place', it takes a special sort of mindset to purchase a toy boat from a beach shop and set off merrily into the blue.

Sadly for the men and women of the RNLI, there's a lot of it about.



Update: The Mail has since got hold of the story - claiming in its inimitable style, that they were 'five miles out' and 'without a paddle', despite the oars clearly visible in the accompanying video and the article stating 'a mile'- and identified the pair:

Mr Hole - a tattoo artist - said: 'It was going well until we got a small puncture and the boat started slowly going flat. We were miles from where we set off. I'm not sure how we got the puncture, but I think it might have been off one of the beer cans cutting the inside.

Quote of the day - "I'll just need to photocopy the baby..."

Spare a thought - if only a small one - for the problems of law-abiding tattoo artists beset by unreasonable demands.

We've already met the unfortunate chap in Wolverhampton whose attempt to deter would-be customers who don't understand English earned him a slap on the wrist from the authorities, multiculturalism being, apparently, more important than the ability to communicate with the person about to ink a permanent design into your skin.

Now it's the turn of a Birmingham tattooist to attract media attention with a notice in his window:

"I don’t care if it’s your 18th next week. The answer is still no – and your children are not ID. Most of the girls in Northfield have a child by the age of 13."

The last statement is, by his own admission, hyperbole* - though that may not prevent a torrent of abuse heading his way in the near future - but the underlying intention is clear:

“I put up the notice because I kept getting young mums coming into the shop for a tattoo and when I ask them for an ID they try and use the child as a form of ID.

This was, he says, happening on a weekly basis, which offers food for thought when you consider the costs involved; the teenage mothers of Northfield clearly have money to burn**.

In any case, the 'House of Pain' tattooing studio hardly seems an appropriate environment for a small child - though opinion on that may differ; regular readers may remember that a mock advert for specialist children's tattoos - 'a gift for life at pocket money prices' - apparently received ten genuine enquiries from parents.

The oddest thing about this story, however, is the suggestion that the child should somehow constitute a valid proof of age. Do the mothers likewise brandish their unfortunate offspring while buying a round in the pub or purchasing age-restricted DVDs or fireworks?

And, more seriously, what is likely to become of children raised by immature mothers whose disregard for the law is matched by their willingness to abuse shop staff when their unreasonable demands are thwarted?


*But not complete fiction; official figures show that over 100 13- and 14-year-olds in the Birmingham area have given birth over the past 5 years.

**Interestingly, subsequent research has turned up this memorable quote on the subject:

'The amount of gold worn by people in Northfield could probably redecorate Tutankhamun’s tomb twice over.'

Painted Lady

Time was when a glimpse of feminine ankle would have set pulses racing for British men.

These days, things are generally rather more relaxed here (although other parts of the world are still rather less accommodating) and, with the advent of summer, bare ankles are visible in offices up and down the land.

It seems, however, that there is still one last taboo:

A high-flying career woman who lost her job because of a butterfly tattoo on her FOOT [sic] is contemplating taking a legal stand.

This is the tale of a woman, employed via an agency, whose contract was terminated because, over a period of weeks, she 'made no effort' to comply with a ban on visible tattoos at her workplace.

She is consulting a solicitor, on behalf of all professionals with tattoos, to see if the Salisbury’s action constitutes discrimination under inclusion and diversity laws.

How public-spirited of her! Frankly, this dispute with her boss looks like a case of irresistible force and immovable object; he says all tattoos must be covered in the office to project a professional image to customers, she says that disguising it would be impractical...

“The only way to cover it would be to wear a sock. I’m a businesswoman and I wear smart dresses to work, so that would look stupid."

 ... and, on the sidelines, in the best soap-opera tradition, the local paper happily weighs in with some loaded narrative making it clear whose side it is on:

Jo [...] did not deal with members of the public and was praised for her “outstanding” work during her five months at Salisbury.

I, for one, would be interested to know why this thirty-something businesswoman - albeit one sporting a rather un-businesslike tattoo - appears unaware that cosmetic tattoo-covering creams are widely available*; indeed, how could it be otherwise, given the popularity of tattooing and the exorbitant price of removal?

“I suggested covering it with a sticking plaster but thought that would look 
unprofessional and draw 
attention to it.”

And who, in sartorially liberated 21st-century Britain decrees that women must wear dresses to work anyway? A smart pair of long summer trousers would surely hide the artwork to the satisfaction of all but the most draconian of employers.

While the policy is, perhaps, a harsh one in a society where even the Prime Minister's wife is no stranger to the needle, given this lady's persistence and her readiness to seek legal advice (and the ear of the local newspaper), it is hard not to conclude that she was stubbornly determined to flout the rules.

Under the circumstances, her choice of the delicate and ethereal butterfly as a motif seems more than a little inappropriate.


*And that's not all; a quick google reveals a host of specialist websites complete with such quotes as:

"Every bride I encounter now needs/wants their tattoos covered for their wedding, and airbrush is the best way to do it."

Double your money

Looking for a new investment opportunity in a growth industry?

How about this one, endorsed by no less than an associate professor at the University of St Andrews School of Business Management?

“It's a brilliant business model because it creates its own demand.”

And what is this sure-fire success story? Those cynics still in possession of all their marbles* may not be surprised to learn that he's talking about tattoo parlours which offer a removal service as well.

We've commented here before on the rise of the tattooist on Britain's high streets; now, with the advent of mass-produced laser tattoo removal equipment, you can now pay someone £100 to ink Miley Cyrus onto your left buttock, then pay the same person ten times that amount to erase it when the embarrassment gets too much (although, by all accounts, you won't be able to sit down for a week afterwards).

The future pain, however, is irrelevant; in much the same way that the advent of the gastric band appears, for some at least, to be a licence to overeat in the certainty that a perceived quick fix is available should they require it, laser tattoo removal offers the possibility of indulgence today and redemption tomorrow, possibly even at public expense.

This, presumably, is why we are seeing headlines like 'What is tattoo roulette? Fearne and McBusted lay down the rules'. Who Fearne and McBusted may be I neither know nor care, but 'celebrities' drawing lots to decide which one of them gets a silly tattoo is an idea with Zeitgeist written all over it and will doubtless be emulated in bars up and down the land.

As fashions change, all those oh-so-trendy early 21st-century doodles are going to start looking decidedly out-of date and inevitably, as time (and gravity) takes its toll, that deliciously ironic My Little Pony peeping coyly over your waistband will begin to resemble a leering elderly cart horse in drag.

If you can get rid of it, you probably will, which is why tattooists everywhere are investing heavily in expensive removal equipment. With surveys suggesting that 17% of people with tattoos subsequently regret them, there's going to be plenty of work out there.

While an average-sized tattoo will set you back around £50-£150, removing it may well run into the thousands. It's a win-win situation; studios can happily cater for the most egregious whims of their clients secure in the knowledge that every tattoo today is a potential goldmine ten years hence.

 *a story handled with efficiency and style in Bucko's post and the attached comments



UPDATE: While we're on the subject, from today's Metro:

A woman who set up ‘the world’s first tattoo parlour for children’ was surprised to receive genuine enquiries from parents keen to ink up their kids.

Sadie Hennessy created the thought-provoking art project by placing an ad outside a high street shop in Whitstable, Kent. Her aim was to incite discussion about the sexualisation of children, but the controversial ‘business’ actually had ten genuine requests.

Mind your language!

A tattooist's lot is not a happy one, at least when it comes to dissatisfied clients:

"The price was £90 [...] But he only wanted to pay £70. He became very aggressive then got three friends who were waiting in a car outside to come in.

He was threatening to kill us. We called the police and he was arrested."

It appears that this difference of opinion originated in a problem of communication between the tattooist and his Iranian customer, whose English was apparently not up the the subtleties of caveat emptor (though, given the length of the tattooing process, the waiting heavies outside suggest a degree of premeditation).

Once the police had removed the offensive quartet, the tattooist, clearly shaken by his ordeal, decided to print a sign and place it in the shop window:

 "If you can't speak English don't even bother coming in."

After a few hours, and presumably having calmed down somewhat, it dawned on him that the sign might be 'misconstrued' so he removed it.

And that would have been the end of the matter, were it not for a passing lecturer in English and Media Studies who took a picture of the sign and tweeted it with the words:

Discriminatory, racist… but also really dumb when you think about it.

To be fair, his main point (albeit expressed in depressingly Americanised terms, given his occupation) appears to be the inherent contradiction of writing the sign in English - rather like buying a bowl inscribed 'DOG' when no-one else is likely to eat from it and the dog can't read - but it was the 'racist' angle which immediately seized the public's attention.

Either the local paper has been doing its best to stir up a hornets' nest or the result has been an undignified scramble to board the outrage bus (perhaps not entirely unconnected with the forthcoming local elections); step forward the Council Leader...

 "I'm glad the sign was taken down. It's a throwback to the 1960s."

...the local MP...

 "The sign was a backwards step but at least it's down now."

...and the Council’s head of regulatory services:

“While we are pleased that the sign has been voluntarily removed, our officers have visited the business concerned and stressed that this sort of behaviour is totally unacceptable."

I must admit to a certain amount of confusion here; are they objecting to the wording of the sign (which was, perhaps, unfortunate as well as illogical) or to the implication that those who do not speak English should not enter the shop?

If the latter, it is certainly discrimination of a sort, but how should this be reconciled with the fact that, as the tattooist says,

"The reason for the sign is tattoos are permanent and we cannot take the risk of making a mistake because we cannot communicate with a customer"?

While the sign could, perhaps, have expressed it in less forthright terms, it is surely quite rational for a tattooist to refuse clients unable to make their requirements clear or give informed consent, and therefore for the studio to warn them that such rejection is likely if they enter the premises.

The sign is gone, but, thanks to the wonders of twitter, not forgotten. As we have seen before, this supposedly ephemeral form actually succeeds in preserving momentary follies and indiscretions beyond all previous limitations.

Ink and Incapability

It's less than three weeks since our last tattoo story, but this week's papers have produced a gem too good to ignore.

Mum Michelle Elliott, 36, said: “I was horrified. It was the worst tattoo I’d seen."

If so, she probably hasn't visited failblog's 'Ugliest Tattoos' page, but this one is pretty dreadful. Mrs Elliott's main objection, however, is that her son is 17 and thus under-age. As Kent Online helpfully explains:

The Tattooing of Minors Act 1969 makes it an offence to tattoo anyone under the age of 18 except for medical reasons. Robin has no medical reasons.

...as if, given the right medical justification, the NHS would endorse hideous back-street inkings as well as the precisely-placed dots needed to line up radiotherapy equipment.

As for the poor innocent lamb at the heart of the story:

He had the tattoo inked on his upper right arm at LoveTattoo in Dymchurch High Street, for £5, last August.

Caveat, as they say, emptor. And, as if the £5 charge were not warning enough, this is the establishment in question:

(Photo: Kent Online)

The article is interestingly vague about the exact inspiration for the design:

Robin chose sergeant’s stripes in honour of members of his family, such as uncles, who had previously served in the Armed Forces.

If it is a  tribute to UK servicemen, then the stripes are not only poorly-executed, they are upside-down. (The US army used to have them the same way as us but flipped them in 1902 to the points-up version current in popular culture - and, presumably, tattoo parlours).

The Elliotts have responded in the now-traditional fashion and set up a facebook page calling for the business to be closed down. Their choice of name is certainly unequivocal:

The LoveTattoo Hate Group grew to have 518 members but Shepway council understands that the business is now shut.

This means that, as well as ceasing the tattooing operation there, it will no longer be providing the other services its owner advertises online:

we also offer, Dermal filler, Botox,
and we sell items like jewellery, ornaments,
and everything I think is worth selling..lol

Oh, and,

learn to heal with laying on hands on body with the help of signs and spirits ...

And, according to her listed interests, you'd be welcome to pop in for a haircut or a tarot reading too. Shutting the shop may not stop her in her tracks, however; as she says on skillpages:

tottooing [sic] is one of my hidden skills.I just love to ink ...anything...i welcome tatt parties&home visits as i am mobile...hey got one jet? why not

I'm sure most of us can think of several reasons, not least this one:

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than is accurate. (Wikipedia)

None of this will restore young Robin's previously unblemished hide, of course, but one hopes at least that he has learned a valuable lesson for the future.

Toast of the week - thumbs up!

This week, we ask you to raise a glass to objectivity, in the shape of a young man with a refreshingly down-to-earth attitude.

 As a way of remembering his best friend, Chris Scullion has set up The Thumb Fund which involves people getting the word ‘Thumb’ tattooed on a big toe.

So far, I admit it's not promising...

Mr Scullion said: “Jay lived with Danny Desmond, who was a tattoo artist. After a few too many beers, Jay decided to get a tattoo of the word “Thumb” on a toe.

Oh dear! Though I suppose he's not the first - and certainly won't be the last...

As a tribute to Jay, his closest friends will be recorded getting the same “Thumb” tattoo on their toes.

Yes, it's another memorial tattoo - that strange phenomenon which is covering Britain's youth in human graffiti and helping to make tattooing a major growth industry.

“The toe is notoriously painful to get tattooed, but it is nothing compared to the pain we have gone through since he died."

And I suppose it beats cutting off a finger, like the Dani people of Papua New Guinea or the Sioux. While I understand wanting to make some kind of gesture after the murder of a friend, self-mutilation does seem an odd way to go about it.

But they do seem to be maintaining a resolutely upbeat attitude in spite of it all; what I liked about the story was this:

“The support has been unbelievable. I think Jamie would think we are all idiots, but that is why he was friends with us,” he added.

You have to admit, there is a certain charm in such clear-eyed self-awareness, which is why, even though he does now sport a truly ridiculous tattoo, Chris Scullion is our toast of the week.


Things will be a little quiet around here for a week or so as I am taking a short holiday away from the lure of the internet - please feel free to pour yourselves a drink and browse the Tavern archives (this might be a good place to start) and do keep leaving comments, which I shall answer when the opportunity arises.

On the Age of Consent...

...but initially, at least, probably not the one you were thinking of:

The furious mum of a 14-year-old girl tattooed by an unlicensed amateur shopped him to police.

In a story fraught with interesting comparisons, an untrained tattoo artist in Gloucestershire has been fined under the Tattooing of Minors Act 1969 (so much for this being a recent phenomenon).

The court was told that the girl 'pestered' the 23-year-old man into giving her a £20 tattoo 'in memory of her grandfather', telling him halfway through that she was sixteen years old.

He admitted not asking her age but assumed she was 18.

As you'd expect from an inexperienced amateur who purchased his needles and ink on ebay, the tattooist didn't ask to see any proof of her age before starting work.

After that, he had no option but to plead guilty, of course, particularly as she told him she was sixteen; it is illegal to tattoo anyone under eighteen except for medical reasons.

It's not the first case of its kind, and will certainly not be the last, but it does raise the problematical question of girls who appear much older than they are. In a case some years ago, a tattooist defended himself after inking a fifteen-year-old:

He said: “What was she doing here at 2.30pm with £100 in her pocket? We had every reason to believe that she was over the age of 20. She did not look under 18.

With cosmetics and adult clothes, some fourteen-year-old girls can easily pass for late teens or even early twenties. I have even observed, on a school trip, a carefully made up and coiffured schoolgirl being mistaken for the accompanying teacher.

Which leads me to an unpleasant but relevant point. In a recent Channel 4 programme about child soldiers, the narrator explained something which may shed additional light on a recent spate of court cases in the UK.

Few people in Afghanistan, he said, know for certain their exact age. A child's stage of development is judged entirely on appearance; for boys, this means that facial hair proves they are old enough to be soldiers, even if, by our standards, they are barely above primary school age. The programme naturally did not concern itself with girls, but one assumes the same criteria apply.

If that attitude extends beyond the borders of Afghanistan and accompanies immigrants to the UK, it presents us with the problem of a sector of society for whom our child protection legislation may well be effectively meaningless.

Leaving aside for the moment the appalling crimes perpetrated against teenage girls in recent years and looking at the broader picture, how do you explain the age of consent to someone who has no concept of chronological age?

Panel-beating, Bicester style

Tales of random violence and anti-social behaviour are, alas, all too common, but something about this story caught my eye:

A 19-year-old man was 
assaulted during a road traffic incident in Bicester on Bank Holiday Monday, May 27.

It may be significant that it took place just round the corner from the temple of conspicuous consumption that is Bicester Village designer shopping outlet, scene of some truly epic traffic chaos on high days and holidays, with predictably frayed tempers all round.

At about 5pm, the victim was driving his peach VW Beetle on Rodney House roundabout.  

You don't see many of those about! The driver of this conspicuous vehicle was obliged to stop when a Vauxhall pulled over in front of him.

A man got out of the Zafira and punched the victim in the face, while a woman, who also got out of the car, punched the Beetle several times.

The unfortunate victim had to go to hospital for stitches; it's not recorded whether the car was also damaged in the apparently unprovoked attack. Luckily, police have a description of the assailants:

The man was white, in his early 30s, 6ft to 6ft 3ins, of muscle build [sic] with short dark hair shaved at the sides.

He was wearing a dark vest top and shorts and had tribal tattoos down both arms.

The woman was white, 30 to 32, of medium build, 5ft 5ins, with shoulder-length blonde hair with dark roots.

She was wearing a white t-shirt and was pregnant.

So police are looking for a large, shaven-headed, tattooed thug with a violent, pregnant girlfriend.

Sadly, I'm not entirely sure than narrows it down, these days.

Tattoo you

It's another of those questions of 'how far do you go to protect people from themselves?'

untrained tattooists are buying equipment on eBay - with terrifying consequences (Daily Mail)

As the Mail helpfully points out, with illustrations, if you fancy setting up in business, you can buy a basic tattooing kit for £20-£30 on e-bay - no need to resort to redneck DIY.

If you want that added touch of respectability, you can even get a licence from the council. Never mind that you have no experience and you're a bit rubbish at drawing; as long as you have a wipeable surface, hot water and an autoclave for sterilising your kit, you could start tomorrow.

You might think that you'd have a problem finding someone foolhardy enough to allow you to have a go, but it seems there are plenty of willing victims out there; the Mail thoughtfully provides an assortment of stomach-churning photographs to prove the point.

This lack of regulation has worried one Kevin Paul, tattoo artist to the stars (well, someone called Harry Styles, apparently), who is lobbying Parliament for legislation to regulate the tattooing industry. From a public health perspective, he's certainly got a point:

‘People who are untrained in tattooing are unaware of the infections and diseases that can be caused by using cheap and unsterile equipment. 

‘Permanent scarring to the skin can be caused if the tattoo is not done correctly and bloodborne diseases such as Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C and HIV can be spread.’

And it seem only sensible to ensure that councils don't hand out licences without some industry-backed proof of training in safety and hygiene, as well as using existing legislation to prosecute anyone who tattoos a child.

But how much difference will it actually make? These dodgy tats are not, by and large, done in established studios; according to Mr Paul, the majority of culprits are working independently from home - or have even set up as mobile tattooists.

And anyone who chooses to get a cut-price tattoo in someone's kitchen or from a man in a van - "Burger and chips twice, mate, and can you do me a picture of Amy Winehouse just here" -  is hardly likely to be swayed by the absence of a piece of paper from the council, which leaves us with the question of enforcement; how far should the state be involved?

Penalise the tattooee and you are likely to get people refusing to seek medical help until major complications have set in; prosecute the tattooer and it becomes an expensive game of testimony and proof played out through an already overburdened legal system.

It's one of those situations where the only practical thing to do is to ensure the public are fully informed - in this case, by a rigorous licensing system - and as well educated as possible in the dangers of using unlicensed practitioners.

And those who still patronise the charlatans should have only themselves to blame.

Now there's a surprise!

Rent arrears among tenants on a government pilot project that pays housing benefit directly to recipients have seen a big increase, figures show.

Perhaps it would have been helpful to have treated the officials concerned to a short talk on ursine lavatorial habits beforehand*. After all, it would take a Pollyanna-ish degree of optimism to assume that a population poorly educated in financial matters and systematically deprived by the state of virtually every opportunity to think for themselves would, without exception, have the skill to manage relatively large sums of money on a regular basis.

[The government] wants to pay recipients directly as they think it will increase their sense of responsibility over their own lives and make them better able to cope should they move into a job.

It's a spectacular example of putting the cart before the horse; since the implication here is that we are talking about the low-paid and unemployed, this argues that among their number will be some who are statistically more likely than the rest of the population to have difficulty with the concept of forward planning and numeracy. Those who haven't managed to develop a sense of responsibility by now are hardly likely to produce one spontaneously to order.

(There will now be a short pause for anyone trained in the knee-jerk rhetoric of the Left - as I once was - to point out that I am being unfair to the many responsible and numerate people who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in need of housing benefit [insert your own apposite example here, preferably incorporating ethnic minorities, single parents and/or children with special needs]. OK; can we move on now?)

Given that we can expect a reasonable proportion of HB claimants to have the self-discipline and mathematical ability to allocate these payments correctly, it is surely a matter of concern that the rates of default are so high:

Figures obtained by BBC News show that arrears among tenants of Wakefield and District Housing in West Yorkshire have increased from an average of 2% to 11% on the pilot projects. 

Bron Afon community housing in south Wales said it had seen a 50% increase in arrears, while pilot projects in Edinburgh, Oxford and Southwark are showing around 30% increases in arrears.

This suggests that, while some will manage the new system with ease, a number of those with less ability to cope will spend the money elsewhere (though it should be observed that the original default rates in the latter two areas are not given). Doubtless much of this expenditure is essential - we are, after all, talking about people unlikely to have any financial buffers for emergencies - but human nature tells us some will regard the cash as an opportunity to indulge themselves and their children.

The BBC struggles valiantly to present this story in the approved fashion with the example of a single mother who used some of her HB to pay her utility bills, but her own statement sounds rather more ambiguous:

"By them paying the money directly to me it created temptation to use it for other things which has resulted in me being in arrears and possibly being evicted. "

She doesn't say what those 'other things are', though I'm not sure that someone would describe paying the gas bill as a 'temptation'; it doesn't sound quite right, somehow. And even if the BBC's token recipient really was selflessly robbing Peter to pay Paul, it's worth noting that the modern-day Newgate that is my local town boasts a vast population on benefits as well as a burgeoning array of tattoo and tanning parlours and nail bars, all of which seem to be doing a roaring trade.

Pavlov's Cat has supporting evidence of a link from his days in the jobcentre front line, and, of course, there is this post, in which I manage to upset someone of a liberal persuasion. I don't have an answer for this - having seen it at first hand in a housing benefit department, I know there is urgent need to deal with unscrupulous and greedy landlords pocketing a fortune in benefit payments. However, if the tenant is to be given the financial upper hand, some safeguards should be put in place for those who cannot cope with the responsibility.

Meanwhile, since predictability is the order of the day, there is really one only one more thing left to say:

The government says lessons will be learned from the pilot projects.

*Though, as with so many other government policies that end in disaster, it's worth bearing in mind that this initiative is largely being implemented by staff recruited under and in favour of the previous administration.

Creepy is as creepy does

It's been a long time since we had a tattoo story here, but this is one I'd really prefer hadn't happened.

Remember Kimberley Vlaeminck? She was the Belgian teenager who claimed to have peacefully slept through the process of having a major facial tattoo.

Her initial assertion that she had only asked for three small stars near one eye but woke to find 56 of them covering half her face made international headlines, and the resulting furore made things so uncomfortable in Belgium for the tattoo artist, Rouslan Toumaniantz, that he decamped to Russia.

Now he's in the news again, having decorated the face of his (very) new girlfriend with his own name in four-inch black gothic script, making Kimberley's constellation look positively tame by comparison.

Objectively speaking, it's a fine piece of artwork; the trouble is that something like this never can be viewed purely objectively. Leaving aside the obvious question of what happens if - or when - the relationship ends, this girls has now been permanently and irrevocably marked as part of the tattooing sub-culture.

What I find most disturbing about this story is the weasel word that creeps into the reporting; 'persuaded'. The girl - Lesya - was already interested in tattoos (her sister is a tattoo artist) before she met Toumaniantz on the internet but had never had one done.

Within 24 hours of meeting him, she had agreed to have his name permanently emblazoned across her face and a few days later, she had taken his surname and was planning a career working alongside him in the expectation that he would tattoo the rest of her body in due course.

It raises interesting questions about the Belgian case; one the one hand, we have an inexperienced teenager and, on the other, a man who appears to combine a liking for spectacular facial tattoos with extraordinary powers of persuasion.

There's something very odd about his involvement in the disfigurement (as most people would see it) of these two young women and the current story is a salutary reminder of the internet's potential role in uniting perpetrator and victim, of which this is, at least, a relatively benign, if startling, example.

Kimberley Vlaeminck was, it seems, brought to her senses by her father's reaction to what she had done; it is to be hoped that Lesya does not experience similar regrets when she escapes from Toumaniantz' sphere of influence.

Quote of the day - bizarre tattoo edition

It's been a while since we had a tattoo story here at the Tavern, although the phenomenon of wearing your heart on your skin rather than your sleeve continues to exert the fascination of the completely incomprehensible.

Some, however, are more incomprehensible than most*:  this is from one Danielle Power, 27, a nurse and part-time model from Romford, quoted in the Independent:

"I'm constantly updating my tattoos; I tend to go in every couple of months. My left arm is covered in roses, and I've got an owl and a ball of wool on my chest – I'm really into arts and crafts."

You don't say!


*The same, of course, could apply to the teenager who now proudly sports a likeness of Boris Johnson on his left thigh - so far beyond boggling that I couldn't think of anything sensible to say about it at the time.

GCSE Tattooing, anyone?

It's been a while since we had a tattoo story here, and in any case, this one raised some interesting issues.

A Virginia mother is outraged after learning her daughter received a tattoo from another student during class at Virginia's Hampton High School.

16-year-old Timisha Deloatch told her mother that she and two other pupils had received tattoos in art class while the teacher watched:

"She closed the door so no administrators would walk past and see, and at one point she took a picture and sent it to her friend."

In fact any parent would be disturbed by the circumstances, particularly since the conditions could hardly have been called sterile.

"He had a packet of sewing needles and a mechanical pencil. He dipped the point in the ink that he had for everybody."

Not a particularly professional job, then - and Timisha, it turns out, was in a position to know: her mother, Lovella Deloatch (Lovella?), had already allowed her to get two tattoos.

Deloatch let Timisha get her grandmother's initials professionally tattooed on her arm and the words "beautiful nightmare" on her lower back.

Just take a moment to consider that one...

Meawhile, the mother seems to have an interestingly hypocritical attitude to the business of tattooing her 16-year-old daughter.

"She might have made a bad judgment call for herself, but she's 16. The adult was supposed to have stepped in and said no," Lovella said.

Of course she's right; if Timisha is to be believed, the teacher has behaved unprofessionally in the extreme. However, the story certainly furnishes food for thought; after all, tattooing is pretty much the only major growth industry in the UK at the moment.

In the town where I live there are now three tattoo parlours and another is proposed. Since a new tattoo practically guarantees column inches, celebrities are rushing to have them done and the public follow suit, generating ever more work for the artists.

Perhaps it's time the school curriculum was broadened to take this into account; it could add a whole new dimension to GCSE art coursework, for example, and would surely increase the chance of school leavers getting a job. They could even do the basic hygiene training in biology class.

There's only one downside to this, as far as I can see, given the current state of educational achievement; the main requirement for the job is always going to be artistic talent but it does help if a tattoo artist has a firm grasp of spelling and punctuation...


see more Ugliest Tattoos

Cherchez la femme

A combination of family matters and mild blogging fatigue/Weltschmerz (this from JuliaM succinctly illustrates why) may keep posting light for a while longer.

Pavlov's Cat today reports a conversation he overheard at work (in a jobcentre) which could serve as  a metaphor for our times...

Adviser: Can you explain why you didn’t make your signing time today?
Customer: It’s my birthday, right and I was getting a tattoo innit and it took a while.
Adviser: I hope it doesn’t hurt too much?
Customer: Nah mate. it’s alright, I’m taking cannabis for the pain.

By coincidence, this story from the Daily Telegraph takes us into the same territory:

A woman with 30 tattoos claims she was told to ''put a bag over her head'' when she went for a job interview.

Hayley O'Neil, 23, - who also has 20 body piercings - says was also advised to ''stand behind a wall'' when she asked a job centre official what post she could apply for.

You have to admit, he'd got a point raising the question of her appearance - I mean she certainly shouldn't be allowed near magnets or high voltage cables.

Miss O'Neil, who got her first tattoo from her mother as an 18th birthday present said: ''I just felt so humiliated. I couldn't believe what this guy was saying."

It's stretching our credulity too, to think that someone in his position would expect to get away with that in today's climate. If he did express himself in those exact terms, then he certainly wasn't at home to Mr Tactful that day - and, more relevantly, had decided to kiss his career goodbye.

It's true that, when you're stuck behind a desk day-in, day-out, dealing with the the stroppy and terminally workshy along with genuine cases of hardship, the sight of someone sporting tattoos that must have cost more than your month's salary might well make you see red.

On the other hand, of course - always assuming he really did say something of the sort - he might actually have been trying to make a serious point in a humorous way:

"The guy said: 'on first impressions do you think anyone would hire you?' He said: ' look at it this way if you were to stand behind a wall - or put a paper bag over your face do you think you would have a better chance?' "

Considering the picture above....er, yes? At least with interviewers of a nervous disposition. But Telegraph headline writers et al, please note that, if those were his actual words, then far from 'advising' or 'telling' her to do it, he was asking her a question, using a graphic example to get her to consider the impact of her appearance.

The subtlety of this approach, however, seems to have escaped her and 'look at it this way' suggests that previous attempts at explanation had met with a similar fate; all she understood was that he was telling her to put a bag on her head. You might like to consider the reaction on her part that must have led up to this:

"He then backtracked and tried to say that he was sorry and hoped I wasn't offended but I was."

In fact, she was so offended that she went straight to the papers with her story - or rather several versions of it.

Significantly, the earliest report made no mention of paper bags or walls - simply stating she was upset by being told she would find it hard to get work anywhere other than a tattoo parlour and by being advised to remove her piercings. From today's Telegraph:

A spokesman for the Department of Work and Pensions denied any inappropriate remarks had been made during the interview, adding "Jobcentre Plus offers standard job hunting tips which include dressing appropriately when going for an interview or visiting a potential employer."

So who's right? And why the discrepancy? A clue, perhaps, lies in the Lancashire Telegraph's initial report on the 22nd:

'Her mother Dena, who accompanied her to the interview yesterday, said: “I was very upset.'

How many adults take their mother to the Jobcentre with them? And in the short intervening time, somebody has comissioned a more flattering photograph, lavishly embroidered the story with juicy, headline-grabbing detail and shoehorned it into a national paper, ensuring plenty of publicity. After all, celebrity careers have been built on less.

My money's on Mum.

(Update: this one's obviously touched a lot of nerves - there are plenty of interesting comments on Subrosa's take on it.  Scotland's answer to Boudicca simply replaces my lengthy ramblings with the title 'Today's non-story' - which says it all, really.)

Hey, kids, y'all want some ink?

Looking back through the archives, I realise it’s been over a year since we last had a tattoo story, so here, to celebrate 4th July, is one from the other side of the pond.

A northwest Georgia couple arrested for giving six of their children homemade tattoos say they didn't do anything wrong. The kids, they say, wanted the tattoos to be like Mom and Dad.

Aaah, bless!

"I'm their mother," Patty Jo Marsh said. "Shouldn't I be able to decide if they get one?"

Well, no, at least not according to State law in Georgia, where both unlicensed tattooing and the tattooing of minors are illegal.

Marsh and husband Jacob Edward Bartels were arrested late last year after the biological mother of some of the children found that markings on their hands wouldn't wash off.

So much in that one phrase –‘ the biological mother of some of the children...’, especially as this was nearly a month later.

Five of their six children, ages 10 to 17, received small cross tattoos on their hands. Another child had "mom and dad" lettered on a hand.

Which 'mom and dad', I wonder (see above)? And crosses? Isn’t that taking ‘bearing witness’ a bit too far? Still, I suppose it saves paying $9.99 for a pendant from Wal-Mart’s Jewelry of Faith [sic] range.

Police described the home-made tattoo gun as a plastic pen with a needle made from a guitar string that was connected to an electric motor.

Yee-haw! Tattoos, religion and redneck DIY – this story’s got it all!

Star-struck

Despite serious competition from Westminster, this week's prize for the most implausible lie goes, of course, to Belgian Kimberley Vlaeminck.

The only surprise in the case is how anyone thought this would get to court; since the father started off the whole media circus after going to the police, I suspect the involvement of a newspaper or magazine may have been a catalyst. This story is simply a vastly overblown version of what happens when teenagers get it wrong and blame someone else.

More surprising is the tattoo artist's chastened declaration that he will from now on get written consent before beginning work - the implication being that any one of us could previously wander into his tattoo parlour on impulse and come out looking like Angelina Jolie or David Beckham - at least in the human graffiti sense - without any contract changing hands.

Where tattoos are concerned, at least, it's clearly a case of caveat emptor - which, come to think of it, might look good written in a banner with a crest above it, right here.

Would you buy a tattoo from this man?

The hot debate over at the Mail online is whether you could fall asleep while being tattooed. More specifically, whether a Belgian girl could, as she insists, have slept peacefully while the gentleman pictured embellished her face with 56 stars instead of the three she allegedly asked for.

Not being one of the inked fraternity, I'm in no position to judge the possibility of this, but I've always understood the process to involve what doctors refer to as 'some discomfort', particularly in sensitive areas. Either this young woman has the hide of a rhinoceros or she was well fortified with some pretty effective pain relief (if so, what? And please can I have some?)

In any case, was it really wise to entrust an aesthetic decision to someone who decorates himself to such an extent, then puts on the most boring pair of glasses imaginable? Although, to be fair, Mlle Vlaminck too seems to have somewhat unconventional ideas about sartorial taste.

He claims she asked for the stars tattoo covering half of her face, only to change her mind when her family reacted badly.

The fact that she seems to have paid the £55 bill is in his favour, as is the assertion in some comments that tattoo artists always ink on a guide pattern in advance.

Still, haven't you ever started doodling and just gone on and on until you filled the page, even though you never meant to?

(Update:this from Graze: Kimberley Vlaminck, 18, claimed that she asked for only three stars to be tattooed near her left eye as a present from her father, Diego, who was upholding a family tradition of tattoos."My father wanted to pay because in our family everyone has a tattoo," she said. )