A Really Close Look At The Studies MRA Blog Return Of Kings Used To Claim That “Science” Proves Tattooed Women Are Broken

MRA slimepit Return of Kings posted an article this weekend about why science proves that women who have tattoos are “broken.” OK! Let’s go there.

The studies that they consulted are the following:

Let’s unpack this. Most of these studies are tiny and hardly serve as a representative sample of all tattooed people. Several of the studies were conducted exclusively on men, so they theoretically have no bearing on conclusions about women with tattoos (women’s cultural experiences are different than men’s, and sites like Return of Kings are hell-bent on keeping it that way). One of the studies they cited to indicate psychiatric problems being associated with tattooing was performed on psychiatric patients with no control group, so literally 100% of the participants had psychiatric problems anyway. Many of them are geographically specific and have nothing to do with women in America (where Return of Kings is based, and, presumably, where they’re looking for women). Studies about adolescents have no bearing on conclusions about adult women. Studies on veterans have no bearing on conclusions about non-veterans. Etcetera.

So while they want to shed the “cold, hard light of science” on women with tattoos, they’re doing a piss-poor job of it. Applying a study about Croatian veterans with tattoos to American women with tattoos would be like me interviewing all the men in the café I’m working in about their drinking habits and then applying it to all the women in France who frequent cafés. The only pattern that you can observe throughout all of the studies is that people who have tattoos have higher rates of risk-taking behaviors, and that’s people, not just women.

So RoK is — duh, of course, obviously, as always — rhetorically incorrect. This doesn’t prove that women with tattoos are broken, because it doesn’t “prove” anything, it barely has anything to do with women specifically, and there’s no clear definition of what “broken” even means. If these women are “broken,” then the men with tattoos are “broken,” too, and that’s worth mentioning if you’re going to make such a sweeping, dramatic statement. The fact that someone is predisposed to risk-taking behaviors doesn’t mean they haven’t learned how to moderate those behaviors, and the fact that someone is predisposed to psychiatric disorders doesn’t mean that they don’t manage it with psychiatric help. And, of course, I would like to know why it is that sexual activity “breaks” women, but not men. Besides, if I’m a malfunctioning woman and it means that I’m unattractive to misogynist slimeballs, GOOD. I’m glad to be broken. The feeling of repulsion is mutual.

Give me a holler on Twitter.