Not that we were under the illusion that The New York Times -especially its antiquated “Sunday Styles” section that had it’s panties all in a bunch for the Chelsea Clinton wedding this weekend – would have a very progressive attitude towards tattoos and body mods, but former Gatecrasher Ben Widdicombe seems to take a particularly harsh stance not just against ink…but the type of women who get them.
Taking aim at European first ladies, Victoria and David Beckham, and George Clooney‘s girlfriend, Ben writes, “Presumably, these beautiful and ancient languages are meant to confer on their hosts an air of profundity, but in the execution they just come off as a shallow, fashionable pose,” and (of Elisabetta Canalis) “But the rose-garland tattoo on her right arm made her look more like she was waiting in line for a nightclub than attending the Oscars. At least the roses looked better than what they covered up — an earlier tattoo that said “Eminem.”
Maybe I’m taking it a little personally because I myself am inked up, but what kind of article is this? “Tattoos are trashy in Hollywood” is not exactly newsworthy, not even style-worthy, especially because Ben targets only those demi-gods: He doesn’t, for instance, mention Justin Bieber or Miley Cyrus‘ tattoos. So this isn’t about young kids making bad decisions they will regret later; it’s about how dare Angelina Jolie try to turn herself “from Hollywood hellion who wore a vial of Thornton’s blood around her neck to husband stealer to Earth mother to United Nations goodwill ambassador,” with each of her tattoos as a stand-in for the big Scarlet “R” that Ben would have Angelina wear.
(Photo via Getty)