Tattooed and Non-Tattooed Women: Motivation, Social Practices and Risk Behavior

Mulheres Tatuadas e Não Tatuadas: Motivações, Práticas Sociais e Comportamento de Risco

Mujeres con Tatuajes y sin Tatuajes: Motivaciones, Prácticas Sociales y Comportamiento de Riesgo

Adriano Schlösser

Universidade do Oeste de Santca Catarina, Brasil

Andréia Isabel Giacomozzi

Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brasil

Brigido Vizeu Camargo

Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brasil

Emanuely Zelir Pereira da Silva

Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brasil

Marlon Xavier

Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain

Today, tattooing is considered one of most prevalent practices of body modification worldwide (Atkinson, 2002). Yet, until recently, tattoos were associated with social outsider or deviant groups such as prison inmates, sailors, gang members, prostitutes, hippies, punks and other groups seen as socially marginal, and labeled as a marker of transgression and deviant behavior. However, recent studies have pointed to alterations in such social stereotype. Tattooed individuals were perceived to be as suitable for employment as non-tattooed ones, suggesting the emergence of a new stereotype for the new generations (Burgess & Clark, 2010; Tate & Shelton, 2008).

As regards tattooed women, as a group it has endured intense social stigmatization for transgressing both social and gender norms - the “gendered body” (Atkinson, 2002). In a study on career-oriented women with tattoos (Armstrong, 1991), 70% of them reported having engaged in risk-seeking behavior. Degelman and Price (2002) found that tattooed women were rated as less attractive, honest, generous and intelligent than non-tattooed women. In a study on body modification, self-esteem, and body investment in adolescent girls, Carroll and Anderson (2002) reported that body modifications were significantly correlated with trait anger-reaction. Hawkes, Senn and Thorn (2004) indicated that attitudes regarding women with visible tattoos were more negative in both sexes, the size of the tattoo being a predictor of evaluation only for non-tattooed men and women. In a study by Seiter and Hatch (2005), tattooed women were rated as less credible but not less attractive. Swami and Furnham (2007) found that tattooed women were considered less attractive, more sexually promiscuous and more prone to engaging in risk behavior, such as alcohol abuse. Wiseman (2010) assessed undergraduates’ perceptions of tattoos on a female college instructor; the presence of tattoos was associated with positive ratings in students’ motivation and how likely they were to recommend her as an instructor.

As regards health, Thompson (2015) found that tattooed women were just as psycho-socially healthy as non-tattooed women. Kluger (2015) did not identify pregnancy problems in tattooed women (tattooists), contradicting the idea that tattoos could cause fetus malformation.

Studies comparing female and male populations have also brought about relevant data, such as the research by Drews, Allison and Probst (2000), who found that tattooed women were more likely to report use of drugs other than alcohol, shoplifting, and body piercings. Wohlrab, Fink, Kappeler, and Brewer (2009) found that, whereas images of tattooed male characters were rated as more dominant, tattooed female characters were perceived as less healthy compared with their non-tattooed counterparts. Perhaps traditional gender stereotypes - women seen as more fragile and less capable of enduring risks associated with tattooing - play a role in such results

As regards sexual behavior, Koch, Roberts, Armstrong and Owen (2005) cite that no significant difference was found between tattooed and non-tattooed college women in relation to the age at which they become sexually active. However, Guéguen (2012) reported earlier experiences of sexual intercourse in tattooed students of both sexes. Research have also found that female students are more likely to get involved in body modification practices (King &Vidourek, 2013).

In comparison with the international literature, there is a dearth of empirical psychological research in the Brazilian context (or with the Brazilian population). Most Brazilian studies are theoretical and employ a qualitative approach (Bicca, Duquia, Breunig, Souza, & Almeida, 2013; Corso & Corso, 2014; Dadalte, Mariano, Pedrão, & Soares, 2013; Macedo & Paravidini, 2014; Macedo, Paravidini, & Próchno, 2014; Pinheiro & Carvalho, 2017; Rodriguez & Carreteiro, 2014), viewing tattoos mostly as a form of subjectivation, as a search for identity through symbolic means. Studies with quantitative and psychometric approaches are thus lacking in the Brazilian context (Conti et al., 2012; Gouveia, et al., 2010; Medeiros, Gouveia, Pimentel, Soares, & Lima, 2010).

Drawing from the recent literature reviewed, this study puts forward as a main hypothesis that tattooed and non-tattooed women will not present differences as regards risk behaviors, taking into account the aesthetic character connected to tattooing today.

Considering the relevance of tattooing practices today, more studies on the theme are needed in the Brazilian context. From a psycho-social viewpoint, the transformation of values, beliefs, and meanings connected to tattooing practices is noticeable indeed. Such transformations are also connected to contemporary ways of conceiving the body as an individual and social construction. Drawing from such observations, this study aimed at identifying the motivations for getting tattooed and its relations with risk behavior and other social practices, comparing such factors in tattooed and non-tattooed Brazilian women.

This study examined the motivations for getting tattooed and its relations with risk behaviors and other social practices, comparing a sample of tattooed and non-tattooed Brazilian women. Our dataset shows an association between being tattooed and a higher rate of health risk behaviors, such as promiscuous sexual behaviors and tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and other substance use. Such results replicate findings from other (international) studies, which correlate tattooing and risk behaviors such as greater use of tobacco, alcohol and other drugs, violence, and lower mental health. These findings were corroborated in samplings of tattooed individuals across different countries, such as Argentina (Busaniche, Eymann, Mulli, Paz, & Catsicaris, 2006), Australia (Heywood et al., 2012), England (Jennings, Fox, &Farrington, 2014), France (Gueguén, 2012), Ukraine (Sosin, 2014), and the USA (Forbes, 2001; King &Vidourek, 2013), amongothers.

Regarding sexual behavior, in this study’s sample there was no strong association between being tattooed and risk practices, contradicting research that associates tattooed people to a higher propensity to risk sexual behaviors, such as, e.g., greater number of sexual partners and engaging in unprotected sex (Heywood et al., 2012; King &Vidourek, 2013; Koch, Roberts, Armstrong, & Owen, 2010; Swami & Furnham, 2007). Although our data point to a significant association between being tattooed and engaging in sexual practices with unknown or semi-known people, caution is warranted due to the sample size and values that are close to the ones found with non-tattooed women. Personality traits such as openness to new experiences and sensation- and adventure-seeking proneness may be seen as a hypothetical cause for both sexual risk behaviors and being tattooed, and appear in different studies on tattooed people (Drews et al., 2000; Stirn et al., 2006; Swami, 2012; Swami et al., 2012; Tate & Shelton, 2008; Tiggeman & Golder, 2006; Wohlrab et al., 2009).

This study did not find association between being tattooed and suicidal ideation, although other studies suggest there is a connection between being tattooed and suicide risk in adults (Solano et al.2014; Yen et al., 2012), that connection being stronger in tattooed women (Carrol &Anderson, 2002). Our results agree with the recent results published by King and Vidourek (2013), which didn’t correlate suicidal behavior with tattooing practices.

As regards motivations for getting tattooed, findings for the Brazilian population point to three main motives: as an avenue of self-expression, of identity/singularity, and as memento of a significant person, which were also found in diverse studies (Atik & Yildirim, 2014; Atkinson, 2002; Byard & Charlwood, 2014; Chakraborty, 2013; Dadalte et al., 2013; Le Breton, 2016; Owen, Armstrong, Koch, & Roberts, 2013; Tiggemann &Hopkins, 2011; Wohlrab, Stahl, & Kappeler, 2007).The same holds for motivations related to attractiveness, art form, and fashion (Czupy, Pongó, Mihálffy, & Susánzky, 2016; Kierstein & Kjelskau, 2015; Koziel & Sitek, 2013; Kosut, 2014; Pajor, Broniarczyk-Dyła, &Świtalska, 2015; Thakur & Verma, 2016). Getting tattooed on impulse was also seen as motivation in our sample, but in low rates. Though the literature (Stirn, Hinz, & Brähler, 2006; Stirn, Brähler, & Hinz, 2006) underlines the importance of impulsive decision making, we agree with Forbes (2001), who found that tattoo practices tend to be carefully planned, especially in adults.

The motivations of non-tattooed people for not getting a tattoo found in this study also concur with the ones mentioned in other studies. Studies on the social perception of tattooed individuals report that it tends to be negative, associated to risk behaviors (Forbes, 2001), or else associating non-tattooed individuals to more valued characteristics such as intelligence, religious, or honesty, for instance (Degelman & Price, 2002; Seiter & Hatch, 2005). The findings in this study did not identify, as regards motivation, answers associated to risk behavior; they were mostly connected to perception of context, confirming findings from previous studies that connected being tattooed to a less conservative appearance and less credibility (Seiter & Sandry, 2003), also influencing impression formation in the context of professional recruitment of women with visible tattoos (Aktinson, 2002).

As regards tattooing and health practices, in our sample the majority of tattooed participants got tattooed in tattoo studios. In addition to the professional procedures related to health (disinfection, sterilization of materials etc.) offered by studios, technical advance has also contributed to their popularization, such as development of safer pigments, more sophisticated equipment, and new asepsis procedures. Professionalization of tattooists has also proved important for the growing social acceptance of tattooing practices (Swami & Furnham, 2007).

Regarding tattoo size, the majority of our tattooed participants had semi-visible tattoos, which can be hidden in case of necessity. In a study comparing samples of tattooed and non-tattooed people, Adams (2009) found that highly visible placement of tattoos was strongly associated with deviant behaviors. One of the principal settings in which such association occurs is the workplace, for tattooed individuals tend to be perceived in a more negative fashion and seen as less professional or less capable of doing their jobs (Aktinson 2002; Armstrong, Roberts, Koch, Sauders, Owen, & Anderson, 2008; Stuppy et al., 1998), although other studies found that individuals with contemporary tattoos were perceived in the same way as non-tattooed ones as regards professional capacity, which suggests that the new generations are changing their stereotypes (Burgess & Clark, 2010; Tate & Shelton, 2008).

In relation to the religious factor, it is well known that religiosity tends to be a strong influence on beliefs and practices, for religious people tend to identify with the norms and values of their religious groups (Koch, Roberts, Armstrong, & Owen, 2004). Prior studies have associated tattooing practices with religiosity (Kluger, 2012; Koch & Roberts, 2012). Koch et al., (2004) found a weak and negative correlation between religion and tattooing, suggesting a higher cultural acceptance of tattooing practices. Rivardo and Kelan (2010) did not find significant correlations between body modification practices and religious variables either.

However, the specific Brazilian religious context, characterized by an upsurge in the number of Pentecostal and Neo-Pentecostal churches that consider body modification practices as sinful and forbidden, may have a very different impact in the association of such variables, in comparison with other countries - which calls for more studies in depth. Considering such context, we may hypothesize that atheist or non-religious women might be more likely to get tattooed. Absence of religious affiliation was associated with tattooing practices in the studies of Laumann and Derick (2006) and Stirn, Hinz and Brähler (2006). In our study, the majority of self-reported followers of Spiritism were tattooed; that can perhaps be ascribed to the fact that Spiritism does not condemn tattooing.

Regarding prejudice, in our sample a significant number of tattooed women reported suffering prejudice or discrimination in different contexts. Although it has been argued that the growing association of tattooing with artistic and aesthetic expression has distanced tattooing from its old negative associations (Burgess & Clark, 2010; Forbes, 2001; Tate & Shelton, 2008), increasing its social acceptance and popularity, it still activates longstanding stereotypes, especially among older generations, which tend to associate tattoos with deviance, criminality, and the working class (Adams, 2009). Several studies confirm the existence of prejudicial and discriminatory attitudes towards tattooed women (Degelman & Price, 2002; Hawkes et al., 2004; Seiter & Hatch, 2005; Swami & Furnham, 2007), warranting cautiousness in the analysis of such practices. As regards prejudice and relationships with family members, the percentage of individuals who didn’t modify their (negative) opinion about tattooing even when they were close to a tattooed acquaintance/family member underlines the resistance of nuclear beliefs and values. Yet studies have shown that having tattooed friends and family members diminishes stigma and heightens acceptation (Dickson et al., 2014), with friends influencing twice as much in that regard in comparison with family members (Roberts, Koch, Armstrong, & Owen, 2006).

Concerning attractiveness, we found that the percentage of tattooed women who reported feeling more attractive and of the ones who didn’t is virtually identical. Three hypotheses were put forward: a) to feel more attractive for being tattooed may be contra-normative, i.e., although there might be a more positive attitude regarding oneself aesthetically, such attitude cannot be verbalized, which can diminish the social value of tattooing; b) the motive for getting tattooed was not originally aesthetic, which does not lead one to think of oneself as more attractive for being tattooed; c) to feel more attractive might have been interpreted as “to others” - i.e. more in an interpersonal rather than in an intrapersonal sense. However, a number of studies support the idea that many individuals get tattooed in order to become more attractive (Drews et al., 2000; Koziel & Sitek, 2013; Seiter & Hatch, 2005; Wohlrab et al., 2009).

In relation to the participants’ mental health, there was a association between being tattooed and having a psychiatric diagnosis. Tattooing has been associated with psychopathology and deviance (D’Ambrosio, Martini, & Casillo, 2014; Hawkes et al., 2004; Keith, King, & Vidourek, 2013; Solano et al., 2014), especially in women (Mifflin, 1997). The prevalence of reported depressive disorder and/or anxiety disorder in our sample was also found in previous studies (Yen et al., 2012; Zrnoet al., 2015). Nonetheless, Frederick e Bradley (2000) found that tattooed individuals presented lower depression scores than their non-tattooed peers. Wethus concur with Stirn e Hinz (2008), who pointed that body modification practices can be connected to a large group of phenomena, from simple peer group imitation to a symptom of possibly severe psychopathological conditions, thus cautioning against associating psychological problems to tattooed individuals, for instance (Swami et al., 2016; Tate & Shelton, 2008).

This analysis examined the motivational characteristics for getting tattooed and its relations with risk behaviors and other social practices in a sample of tattooed and non-tattooed Brazilian women, representing one of the first efforts to analyze quantitatively tattooing as an important social contemporary practice among the Brazilian population. The results presented here, albeit significant, offer just an incipient analysis, given the (small) sample size in comparison with the Brazilian population. However, it is noteworthy that our findings are consistent with many findings from prior researches presented above, and that this study represents an exploratory quantitative analysis of an important inquiry field that, in the Brazilian context, has been almost exclusively studied qualitatively. Future research would benefit from a mixed methodological approach (quantitative and qualitative), and could also focus on characteristics and social contexts of tattooed individuals.

Despite our merely preliminary results and the need to replicate them with larger samples, we agree with prior studies in that differences found between tattooed and non-tattooed individuals seem to have gradually diminished, suggesting that tattooed individuals tend to be more similar to their non-tattooed peers than dissimilar (Swami et al., 2016), which in turn is due to greater popularization and social acceptance of tattooing practices. Studies with tattooed men and comparative studies between the sexes also deserve more research efforts, generating findings that can favor a sustained scientific production on such field of inquiry.