To think this is a mark of ownership, not a sign of love??

[BertieBotts]

news.bme.com/2013/01/30/lesya-and-rouslan/

(Warning for nudity and also blood - not safe for work or children!)

So after a month of knowing this guy she gets married to him. A week later he's tattooed his name on her face. This is the same guy who "accidentally" tattooed 56 stars on a woman's face when she wanted 3 (which was apparently a language issue, but why on earth wouldn't you just draw out the design or something, I have no idea.)

I personally have no problem with tattoos and if someone wants to get their entire body tattooed then fair enough. But why start with the name? On the FACE? FIVE WEEKS.

And the picture of the tattoo in progress makes me feel a little ill. It's almost like the point of the photo was to show it in it's most horrific state, why would you want that publicised?

Urgh the bloody one made me gag.

I have tattoos. I like them mostly. I don't like tattoos on faces. It's like he's branded her!

She's gonna seriously regret that

Its not a great idea.

As for the 56 stars bit. Surely the woman knew the difference between 3 stars being tattooed on with a needle and 56. Its not like she asked for 3 and got 4.

wrt the "56 stars" thing: ..the 18-year-old has finally confessed she did not fall asleep, that she wanted all the stars and was 'fully aware' of what Toumaniantz was doing.

I was just going to point out that the girl asked for the 56 stars but was scared of what her df would say so lied.

I think the gf will end up regretting it but that's her call.

I love tattoos, have five and getting my sixth soon. I thin they can beautiful and artistic.

That said, I would never get a tattoo of a partners name anywhere on my body, let alone my face (not that I could anyway, my tattooist doesn't tattoo faces or necks).

How is she going to get a job? Every place I have worked has stipulated no visible tattoos (obviously depends on the branch of work you do). All five of mine are covered by a pair of trousers and a shirt.

It does seen a bit 'branding' to me, but her...face? Her call!

The worst thing of all about that is that when she regrets it (as she almost certainly will) then laser removal will leave her very pretty face badly scarred. That photo at the bottom is beautiful though. The juxtaposition of her flawless alabaster skin against his totally tattooed body just makes you realise how much more beautiful and un-tattooed body is than a tattooed one.

And as for the rest of the website, well... I find it very hard to believe that people who are into mutilating themselves, cutting, branding, suspension through skin piercings etc do not actually need sectioning. I can't even bring myself to look on the 'extreme' over 18s bit.

I know lots of 'mentally stable' people with facial tattoos and modifications

The girl is training as a tattoo artist so I don't think it will hinder her job prospects there.

It wouldn't be my choice to have DHs name on me anywhere but whatever floats her boat really, its a really well done tattoo.

Oh God that reminds me of the muzzle thing Hannibal Lecter wore in Silence of the Lambs.

I actually think its a mark of abuse (not to mention more free publicity for his business). He now has a history of marking young women for life.

In any profession, if he used his professional skills to act in such a way, he would be up before the governing body and struck off.

I also agree with Back2Two.

Oh god thats...erm, different. All I could think is good luck getting anyone else if their relationship breaks down.

I saw an article once about a woman who used nail scissors to give herself a forked tongue. ie. She snipped it in half up the middle. She clearly must have mental health issues to mutilate herself like that.

Ugh. It's completely proprietorial. The worst pic for me is the naked one, where his middle finger is about to be inserted. That picture to me, just says I own all this.

He now has a history of marking young women for life.

Erm, don't all tattooists? The girl with the starts is totally irrelevant to this, it was her choice.

I agree Hazel. She looks so passive and he looks so aggressive and possessive.

No, its not irrelevant. It shows a history of his behaviour towards a certain category of person. Always young females, probably easily influenced. A sensible, responsible tattoo artist would refuse to do this work in this way.

To give an analogy, there is a kind of mental disorder that attracts sufferers to have parts of their bodies amputated. Most doctors will refuse to carry out this work. There was an outcry in this country a few years ago when a doctor said he was willing to do it. The doctor would almost certainly have been up before the BMA and quite likely struck off if he had done.

The question is, should the same protections apply to people who are not using the traditional professions for body mutilation?

Unless the name is your DC, names are rarely a good idea.

Omg, I just went back and looked it really does look like he's about to finger her

[sick]

My thoughts exactly, Hazel. Ick.

Thats exactly what I was thinking Hazel, yuck.

God that's awful. It really does look like the Hannibal Lecter thing.

I have a tattoo, I really have no problem with them but this is different. He's branded his name across her face, obliterating her features. If he loved her, I don't see how he could do that. IMO he just sees her as his property.

Love means telling someone that tattooing your face isn't always a good idea....

The look of defiance in his eyes in that nuddy picture is frightening.