Do 'tattoos' and 'baby' belong in the same sentence???
OK, I get that perhaps these are supposed to be funny, and a little kitschy, but is there any real reason to put a tattoo on a baby? the folks over at PopSugar seem to be asking the same question. They came across these inexpensive and mildly entertaining $5 set of tattoos for babies recently and took a poll.
According to the site, 50% of its readers like the idea of getting a tattoo of their beloved tots on themselves, but I'm not sure how many would agree it's a good idea to pen one on a baby--real or otherwise. I've heard of people getting their kids' ears pierced right after their born, or when they're little, but this is something all together different. Like I said, kinda funny, but way out of the ballpark. That said, many would argue it's fun and no real harm is done. Plus it is kinda cute, in that aforementioned kitschy way.
To be honest, I thought the whole tattoo trend was losing its umph--very been there, done that...and then had pricey surgery to have that removed. The fake tattoos are great for those who want to get in on the trend but not be left with the ugly aftermath once the trend is over. When I was a kid it was seen as a very no-no thing to have a tattoo. When I was a teenager it was seen as the ultimate in coolness. Then everyone got one--real or fake, kids or adults--and the trend became so popular that having a tat became boring. If it's gotten to the point where even your kid has a fake tattoo, isn't it time to move on to something else?