Rowland Case

1. Based on the introductory paragraph the three main points that Rowland promises to cover in the body of her paper are how tattooing has become a phenomenon in the past era for the following reasons: they are a way for people to express themselves and their beliefs on their skin as an attempt as self-identity and individualism, the media portrays tattoos as being attractive to the opposite sex, or to rebel against society. After reading the paper I agree she achieved to cover all three points.

2. In the first main point Rowland offers references from an article written by DeMello in which she interviews an individual about the decision to get a tattoo and his response was “the power of the tattoo is in the ability to express individuality in its permanence”, as well as an example from a tattooing TV show LA Ink, where a girl gets a colorful peacock tattoo on her arm that represents her mother. I think both of these points are sufficient because they are coming from two different sources unknown to each other where both people agreed a tattoo would mean something to each person individually, therefore showing their individualism in ideas.

3. The supporting details Rowland offers for her second main point are studies of college students and examples of movies and commercials of well-known celebrities such as David Beckham and Angelina Jolie. I think the details that are the most convincing are the celebrities mentioned in this particular body paragraph of the paper, because I feel that we live in a society that spends more time reading magazines or watching TV rather than reading a newspaper or keeping up with social studies, saying that I feel that those examples show more how the media uses these celebrities to portray tattoos as being attractive to the opposite sex.

4. I think the ideas from the author’s third body paragraph that are most memorable would have to be where she quotes another individual in DeMello’s