Flesh Club

May 31, 2001 7:07 PM

Flesh Club - just like tug of war, only with steel hooks embedded into your back. It's a gruesome article but it makes a good point. As tattoos and conventional piercings become ever more mainstream, self-respecting freaks have to push boundaries ever further. And maybe someday, even this will seem tame.
posted by jia (45 comments total)

Sorry, but I'm not clicking on that link. Ever since I saw the couple with matching nose rings in each other's nostrils, attatched by a fairly heavy gold chain, I've been turned off to piercings. yech.
posted by SpecialK at 7:23 PM on May 31, 2001

Life imitated demented art (the art being Fight Club).
posted by ktheory at 7:32 PM on May 31, 2001

brr... i don't like piercings. ear rings are fine, but the less conventional the place, the more disgusting it is to me... sorry but... brrrrrr
posted by moz at 7:35 PM on May 31, 2001

And I thought that scene in The Cell was make believe.

Ouch >:(
posted by pnevares at 7:55 PM on May 31, 2001

I got up to the part about his ureth..... I'm not even going to say it. I stopped reading immedietly. Yeeeeeach.
posted by tomorama at 8:28 PM on May 31, 2001

Please don't let these people live near me..please..oh shit Phoenix New Times.... damn locals.
posted by crackheadmatt at 8:58 PM on May 31, 2001

Ah, you're all worthless and weak :)

Personally, I found that article enthralling. Talk about overcoming your fears/personal boundaries. I've got two earrings, a tattoo, and have had both nipples pierced at one time or another (one before that is gone, one current), and they something of personal challenges to me. But holy shit, suspending myself from hooks? Wow. I can't even contemplate that.

And on another personal note, I resent the term "freak". A lot of people aren't cool with piercings, and I respect that. They don't want to do that to their bodies. Fine. But I want to have dominion over my body, as much as possible. I don't think I'm a freak. I'm just different. As someone in the article pointed out, it's funny that in this society no one cries out when someone wants to sit on the couch watching TV and becoming obese, or when some guy wants to pump iron all day and have ridiculously bulging muscles. That's just as weird. But I put a piece of steel through a part of my body, and all of a sudden I'm a freak? That thought needs to be rethunk.
posted by starvingartist at 9:02 PM on May 31, 2001

Fakir Musafar, Chris Burden, Vito Acconci, Stelarc, Julia somebody

(warning: last link very icky)
posted by rodii at 9:42 PM on May 31, 2001

What about those people who get perfectly healthy limbs amputated? Kinda leaves mere skin-hooking in the dust, imho...
posted by beth at 10:09 PM on May 31, 2001

I thought the most amusing part of the Fakir photograph was the image of this man with terribly painful looking body modifications, sporting a clean cut, immaculately combed head of hair. I guess people just weren't into bleach and dye back in the 50's.
posted by tomorama at 11:06 PM on May 31, 2001

I mean, I'm all for self expression but... jeese, this goes way beyond that... Gotta blame it on the parents I guess... people these days have so many piercings, they whistle on motorcycles
posted by danger at 11:39 PM on May 31, 2001

rodii: Oh well. Julia's probably helping out an unknown girl from the Midwest with cancer at the moment. Topless with hooks in her pink flesh for all the world to see via the Internet, but that bit with the Carpenters lyrics broke her up, tore her to pieces, sorta like with the hooks, only not as painful, when you really think about it.
posted by raysmj at 12:07 AM on June 1, 2001

freak: A thing or occurrence that is markedly unusual or irregular

I think those with noticeable piercings fall safely into this category...

Of course, as they become more mainstream they will become less "freakish" (by definition)
posted by owillis at 12:56 AM on June 1, 2001

I'm talking about connotation here, owillis. How many times have you used the word freak to mean a good thing? Take crackheadmatt's post: "Please don't let these people live near me..please..oh shit Phoenix New Times.... damn locals." WTF? Like these pierced freaks are going to come out at night and rob your homes? Kidnap your daughters and pierce them against their will a la Strangeland? Yes, we're unusual, but we are not monsters.
posted by starvingartist at 6:30 AM on June 1, 2001

I just don't understand the appeal of piercings. Especially not the *large* ones (I know a guy with a seven-inch bone through his nose). For my own part, I think I came factory-equipped with the correct number of perforations... but to each their own.

An open (and serious) question to starvingartist and anyone else: What *is* the appeal of piercings? What motivates you to go out and have this done to you?
posted by darukaru at 7:19 AM on June 1, 2001

It's different for everyone. For me, it's a couple of things. One, I just like the look of body modification. I think my nipple piercing looks cool, and that's enough justification for me. Two, it's a personal statement. My tattoo is of my fraternity badge (any Theta Chis here?) - I've got one, my little brother's got one, and two of his little brothers have them, and we're the only ones in my chapter. It's kind of a family thing, a distingushing heirloom.

There are other reasons that are difficult to delve. The first time I got my nipple pierced I was doing my junior year abroad in London. I was away from my family and my girlfriend, with whom I was trying to have a serious relationship, and I was very lonely. I had recently started to become interested in the modification scene (I only had the two earrings at that point), and getting a piercing seemed like a good way to help deal with all the depression and anger I was experiencing. A physical stimulus to help overcome a mental disorder. And I think it worked. I think it's the same idea as a physically exhausting workout to relieve stress.

And of course, for some people, the pain is what they're after. It really is a great endorphin rush. Me, I don't react well to endorphins - both times I got pierced I felt very faint immediately afterwards and was woozy for about an hour. But others like the rush - it's a natural high.

Like I said, it's different for everybody. I kind of like the term "modern primitive" that was coined by the Fakir. It suggests a cultural stimulus that is concerned less with modern social niceties and more with symbols and personal expression, regardless of what other people think. Except for my earrings, my mods are covered most of the time. As an actor, I can't afford to get any drastic mods that would prevent me from getting work, and that disappoints me. I would like to express my personality in a more visual way if I could. I know that sounds "artsy" and you could probably say, "Just write a play or paint a picture", but my tendencies very rarely lean that way. I want to wear my soul on my sleeve, so to speak. Not very many people want to see it, however.
posted by starvingartist at 7:41 AM on June 1, 2001

OUCH! I haven't cringed that much since the Stinky Meat Project.
posted by quirked at 8:57 AM on June 1, 2001

I am completely unable to understand why anyone would want to do something like this to their body. It doesn't gross me out, though. It just mystifies me. (Yes, even after your excellent explanation, starvingartist.)
posted by kindall at 10:27 AM on June 1, 2001

Piercing is one thing, outrageous bodymod (splitting tongues, amputations, etc. etc. et gory cetera) and flesh-pierced suspensions are another. There are healthier and far less damaging ways of getting an endorphin rush, kids.

It is ironic me that all of the people I know who are into this are "compassionate vegetarians" yet enjoy being treated like sides of beef. I always think of that line in the flick Johnny Dangerously: "You shouldn't hang me on a hook. My mother hung me on a hook. . . once."
posted by Dreama at 11:12 AM on June 1, 2001

Piercing is one thing, outrageous bodymod (splitting tongues, amputations, etc. etc. et gory cetera) and flesh-pierced suspensions are another.

What about:
-nose jobs
-face lifts
-boob jobs
-liposuction
-extreme bodybuilding
-corsets
-control-top pantyhose
-wearing shoes too small (80% of women in one survey did this)
-wearing undergarments too small
-4-inch fingernails

I could go on. We all do a lot of weird things in the pursuit of personal beauty. And if you read my whole post, or the article in question, or anything else about extreme body mods, you would know it isn't all about the endorphin rush. Actually, a very small population of the mod scene is after the rush alone.
posted by starvingartist at 11:44 AM on June 1, 2001

Hanging from hook is a pursuit of personal beauty?

Pardon me while I try to find the ass I just giggled off.
posted by Dreama at 11:48 AM on June 1, 2001

Screw you, you know what I meant. We've gone so far beyond basic instinctual activities for survival, such as hunting and gathering, that there really shouldn't be a question about what is right or wrong for us to do with our bodies. Ever look at paintings of nude women from the Rennaisance? By today's standards, they're FAT. But at the time they were considered beautiful. Nowadays you'd never catch a Titian nude on a New York fashion runway. And did our cavemen ancestors care about rippling muscles? Hell, no.

We don't have to rely on our bodies nearly as much for survival anymore, so doing strange things to them is more and more viable. I didn't mean to say that it was all in the pursuit of beauty, and you know that's not what I meant. But because you think it's stupid and can't accept that somebody else wants to do it, you would rather mock us. Fine. At least we're comfortable with our strangeness.
posted by starvingartist at 11:58 AM on June 1, 2001

Obviously, you're not, or you wouldn't care that other people find it strange, harmful, stupid and repugnant to look at. Hang yourselves up by your eyeballs for all I care, but be prepared to deal with the reactions by people who can find non-injurious ways of enjoying their bodies.
posted by Dreama at 12:00 PM on June 1, 2001

Wearing *underwear* too small? Give me the hooks any day.
posted by rodii at 12:10 PM on June 1, 2001

I can't speak for everyone. If I wasn't comfortable with it, I would go around shirtless all the time screaming, "Look! I have a nipple piercing! Accept me! Look! LOOOOOK!" What upsets me is when I hear words like "stupid", "freak", "idiot", "revolting", "What the fuck is wrong with you?" I never understood how someone could call a choice of mine stupid and then tell me to calm down and not be defensive when I get upset about it. I consider being called stupid a personal insult. That has nothing to do with my comfort or lack of comfort with my body mods. I was uncomfortable with my body before the mods; now I'm not.

When you say things like "Hanging from hook is a pursuit of personal beauty? Pardon me while I try to find the ass I just giggled off.", you're dismissing me wholesale. You don't want to even try to understand, so you treat me like a silly little idiot. And I hate that. I'm comfortable with my piercings. I'm not comfortable with you calling me repugnant and rejecting my choice out of hand because you think it's stupid.

And by the way, flesh suspension done correctly isn't harmful. Yes, it hurts, but so does anal sex sometimes, and so do your muscles after a really good workout. Other than some scar tissue it doesn't do permanent damage, which is a lot more than I can say for socially sanctioned pasttimes like smoking and drinking. But people think it's ugly, so it gets looked down upon. Nobody's allowed to do anything that might be considered ugly.
posted by starvingartist at 12:12 PM on June 1, 2001

starvingartist: And smoking isn't looked down upon? Alcoholism and repeat binge drinking are considered socially acceptable?
posted by raysmj at 12:25 PM on June 1, 2001

I think there's a bit of distinction between piercing and PIERCING. Yet they have the one thing in common that is there are cultures that see it as being a way to enhance one's appearance much like many european-like countries view conventional make-up. When it all comes down to it, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
posted by samsara at 12:27 PM on June 1, 2001

raysmj - I have a very good friend who is an alcoholic. He is a well-known member of the theater community here in Cleveland. Everybody knows he drinks... a lot. But when we see him two-fisting it in the bar after a show, or when we smell it on his breath during a rehearsal, we look past it and let it go because he is a gifted comedian and a great friend.

I have many, many friends who smoke. They spend a lot of money on cancer sticks. And the worst they get is the occasional, "You know, you really should quit. That's bad for you."

But if I were to pierce my eyebrow, get subdermal implants, or split my tongue (in order of increasing extremity), I would probably never get acting work in Cleveland again, I would get called a lot of nasty things, and basically be treated like an outcast by most people except the ones who really know me well. And I have a feeling that deep down, some of them might even have a small voice saying, "Man, that's really stupid".

There is indeed a double standard. You may think it's only perceived, but it's there.
posted by starvingartist at 12:38 PM on June 1, 2001

starvingartist: I live in the Deep South, a heavy smoking area, and I got a severely hard time by people close to me about smoking, which I quit in September after countless attempts. You're forced to go outside to smoke, can't smoke in public buildings, etc. And why not? Should society encourage it? The attorney general of my home state, Mississippi, sparked a series of suits against tobacco companies which caused them to lose millions, and also helped spark a series of events which made tobacco execs to look like Public Enemy #1 for many months. In the meantime, the harassment is why a few people choose to smoke or continue smoking. Sort of the same pain thing going, a sort of masochism at work.

And who out there believes that overdoing working out can be bad for you? Smoking is bad for you no matter how much you smoke. But working out can become an narcissistic addiction. What intelligent person would argue otherwise?
posted by raysmj at 12:52 PM on June 1, 2001

I feel like we're getting off topic here, and it's very difficult to cover all variables of a point in one post. Yes, smoking is looked down upon. Yes, alcoholism is looked down upon. Yes, piercing is weird, and even I find some really extreme mods a little over the top. My point is, anything we do to enhance (or destroy) our bodies is weird, from a naturalistic point of view. But why does is some weird accepted on the whole, and other weird considered stupid and repugnant? I don't want to fillet my penis open, but if this Haworth guy from this church does, fine. I'm not going to condemn him. I'm sure it doesn't change the way he's going to speak to me as a person.
posted by starvingartist at 1:15 PM on June 1, 2001

But why does is some weird accepted on the whole, and other weird considered stupid and repugnant?

Because society, and many people in it, are quick to judge based on appearance; this stems from pure ignorance, which I think you might have already figured out.
posted by hijinx at 1:19 PM on June 1, 2001

starvingartist: Yes, but he's bringing attention to himself for it, and shouldn't complain. No one should be physically harmed or violently taunted (by people outside their circle or friends or family) for anything outside of being a murderer or rapist or child molester/pornographer, I don't think. But you'll be snickered at for choosing to being different, if you decide to be different. That's why some people do decide to be different, actually. But the stigma, such as it is, that is brought upon individuals who decide to deviate so heavily from the norm of their own free will is a stigma of their own making. And I can't sympathize with people in such cases. There are plenty of other people with real, unsolicited hurt to worry about.
posted by raysmj at 1:26 PM on June 1, 2001

I've forgotten what it was I was trying to prove in the first place. I would like to think that we could change as a society to the point where judgment is based on someone's depth of character and personality, not on appearance alone. I realize that appearance is part of your personality, and there are some total assholes with bones through their septums, but David Duke looks like the poster boy for white-bread America, so there you go. I guess I'll just have to live with the epithet of "freak".
posted by starvingartist at 1:48 PM on June 1, 2001

starvingartist: Then why bother putting things on yourself at all, and not just wear jeans and T-shirt all day? Clothing means something, or you wouldn't bother, right? (Well, nudity can mean something else entirely. Many other things, of course.) You wear your soul on your sleeve, right, so to speak? Why do you want people to see it at all? So they'll know how good or pure your soul is? No one can know that without knowing you, and then they can't ever know with 100 percent accuracy. Might make a person look as if he or she wants to appear more pure than thou too, which can be obnoxious.

I said no one should scream anything at you who is not related to you or a close friend. Violence and violent taunts should not be tolerated. But you know darn well what you're getting into, and I refuse to feel like I should be sympathetic.
posted by raysmj at 2:03 PM on June 1, 2001

So, ray, I can go ahead and yell at you when you're walking down the street, too, just because you're wearing clothing? Or, I can just snicker at you? Cool! "What a stupid looking green t-shirt and blue jeans, you freak!"

After all, the term freak is subjective.

starvingartist: I would like to think that we could change as a society to the point where judgment is based on someone's depth of character and personality, not on appearance alone.

I'm on a very similar mission, believe it or not. I don't know if one or two people will do it, but if your thoughts and ideas can get across to at least one other person, you're doing your part.
posted by hijinx at 2:42 PM on June 1, 2001

I having no piercings or tatoos but I find the whole idea that someone who does should be treated as a freaky outcast silly. Hating people because they're "not like you" is an obvious indication of predjudice. But stupidity is fairly common. If people are going to be stupid and say ignorant things the best thing you can do is help them to understand. If they still don't listen then ignoring them works.
posted by davidgentle at 3:41 PM on June 1, 2001

hijinx: I could walk down the street and yell at you because you are able to read, but won't do so, because it would require too much work.
posted by raysmj at 3:44 PM on June 1, 2001

hijinx: And if I went into a group full of people with tattoes and body modifications and whatnot and begged to be accepted, I'd be snickered at, probably worse. Not that I think getting beaten up or verbally assaulted in public would be OK, right? Which I said, correct? Your point? Rebels with a cause, who don't want to be seen as rebels in any way, shape or form. How totally lame.
posted by raysmj at 3:51 PM on June 1, 2001

Ah well, perhaps not having piercings, body mods, odd hair cuts and stuff will be fashionable in the future. If so, I'm way ahead of you guys.

In another 20 years when everyone else is smoking, taking cannabis, having anal sex and has multiple piercings, I will ROXORS!!

Joking aside, this reminds me of the old arguments about 'underground' music. After a while, there were more people into the underground music than mainstream music (especially with dance culture here in the UK).. so much so that the underground stuff is now the mainstream. Ditto for 'alternative' music.

Everyone wants to be alternative.. so much so that the alternative becomes the mainstream. Just be yourself, quit 'trying' to be alternative. We're all alternative anyway.
posted by wackybrit at 8:50 AM on June 2, 2001

Remember when tattoos were shocking?
Nose piercings?
Brightly coloured hair?

Give it another decade. You'll get used to this too.

-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 8:49 PM on June 2, 2001

ray: And if I went into a group full of people with tattoes and body modifications and whatnot and begged to be accepted, I'd be snickered at, probably worse.

My point is this: why is it socially acceptable for you to do so? You have the right to go ahead and laugh at those people? While you say that you don't condone verbal assaults of any kind in public, your statements here suggest otherwise.

However, you twisted my example. I offered up the example that, in your world, I could laugh at someone for wearing clothing. You came back saying you could laugh at me for knowing how to read. This is an entirely different argument. Mine is based on appearance and yours is based on a hypothesis. You can't tell if someone can or can not read simply by looking at that person.

Likewise, and my driving point is, you can't conclude anything about a person based on his or her appearance. If you can't see that, well, I feel sorry for you and your ignorance... but, then again, it's your choice to be ignorant.
posted by hijinx at 12:30 PM on June 3, 2001

You can't tell if someone can or can not read simply by looking at that person.

If you could, would it still be wrong to make judgments about them?

you can't conclude anything about a person based on his or her appearance.

If I see someone with a tattoo, I think it would be fair to conclude that they don't object to tattoos. Sorry if this is ignorant.
posted by kindall at 12:36 PM on June 3, 2001

kindall: If you could, would it still be wrong to make judgments about them?

That's more of a societal and ethical question, don't you think? My opinion is that, yes, it'd be wrong to pass judgment on someone based on what you could magically know just by looking at someone. I can just imagine the conclusions people would jump to. That person can't read, so that person is worthless, for instance.

If I see someone with a tattoo, I think it would be fair to conclude that they don't object to tattoos. Sorry if this is ignorant.

Funny, just by looking at you, I couldn't tell that you enjoy picking apart semantics. I apologize if my lack of a clause clouded my argument. You can't reliably conclude anything about a person's intelligence or beliefs just by looking at him or her.
posted by hijinx at 1:22 PM on June 3, 2001

You can't reliably conclude anything about a person's intelligence or beliefs just by looking at him or her.

I'd say that even this more strict form is debatable. Clothes, as well as body modifications, are widely considered to be a form of self-expression. Thus, it is within the realm of possibility that they might actually express something about the person who chooses them. People frequently choose particular clothes, hairstyles, and other fashion affectations in order to be identified with a particular group of people. They often claim membership in a certain group because they perceive themselves as sharing beliefs with other members of that group.

Completely reliable I suppose it is not, but it certainly has some informational content. The reason stereotypes persist is that many of them have some basis in fact. Appearance (particularly those aspects of our appearance under our control) is a nonverbal means of communication, and to argue that the message you receive in this manner has no significance whatsoever is as misguided as to assume it is always completely reliable.
posted by kindall at 2:21 PM on June 3, 2001

I see what you're getting at, kindall, and it's a good point. I maintain my statement, though; stereotypes, by definition, don't carry a negative quality about them. Society brings these in. Are they justified? I still don't think so.

Claiming that someone with tattoos, for example, is a freak is just as dangerous as saying that someone wearing a t-shirt and jeans shops at Gap. It just doesn't have a solid enough basis for me.
posted by hijinx at 5:04 PM on June 3, 2001