What's the point of a black guy getting a tattoo?

Take Tyson and 50c as examples. Regardless of race issues, from an
aesthetic point of view, what's the point of a guy that dark getting a
tattoo. It can hardly be seen. On pale skin such puprle ink would make
sense, but not on black. The tattoos also tend to be way over–the–top
in size and detail. What is it? An expression of an ill–gotten,
ill–spent wealth?

On 20 Dec 2005 16:07:29 –0800, casiocult...@gmail.com choked out
these words:
bad troll! bad, bad!

David RL G=E4rtner, RMT wrote:
It's not a troll. Why is it bad though?

On 20 Dec 2005 19:50:22 –0800, casiocult...@gmail.com choked out
these words:
oh, it's a troll alright. and it borders on rascist. you're
saying tattoos are ok for whites, but not ok for blacks. that's
just all kinds of f*cked up.
david
––
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amoephoto/

David RL G=E4rtner, RMT wrote:
It's not racist. That's stupid. I'll tell you what's racist, your blind
attitude towards concrete racial differences. Skin colour is a matter
of fact. Just like hair type. I'm sure black women or men take that
into consideration when choosing makeup or clothes, same for whites,
olives or browns.
I do indeed think that from an aesthetic point of view dark tattoos
"are ok for whites, but not ok for blacks", especially so for dark
blacks. Everytime I see a dark black man with a dark tattoo I think
he's awfully misguided.
Take a look for example at tribal tattoos in Africa, they had the good
sense to use lighter tattoos and body art.
http://www.faheykleingallery.com/images/photographs/riefenstahl_l/riefensta=
hl_africa_11_bg.jpg

On 20 Dec 2005 23:51:34 –0800, casiocult...@gmail.com choked out
these words:
<some crap>
bye, troll.
<pl0nk>

David RL G=E4rtner, RMT wrote:
You stupid!

David RL Gärtner, RMT wrote:
How about this? They are not OK for anyone. Period. It's your body,
not a wall for graffiti.