CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.0 Background
Body modification (body art) has been practiced in almost every culture around the world for several decades (Grief, Hewitt & Armstrong, 1999). Featherstone (1999) described body art as a long list of practices, which includes branding, cutting, tattooing, piercing, binding, and insertion of implants to modify the appearance and form of the body. Contrary to the assertion that the history of body modification is difficult to track (Fisher, 2002), body modification has an extensive history dating back longer than one might imagine. The oldest body art ever found in history was on an Egyptian mummy around 2000 BCE. Researchers recorded about 61 tattoos on Iceman, a mummy that dates back 5300 years (Samadelli, Melis, Miiccoli, Vigl, & Zink, 2015). Besides this discovery, many other mummified body art examples have been revealed and documented in history (Samadelli et al., 2015).
In the West, Captain James Cook and his group of tattooed sailors are credited with introducing tattoos in the mid-years of 1700s (DeMello, 2000). Similar to tattooing, piercing of the body has also been in existence in almost every society as far back as it is possible to trace, but it has usually been confined to the ears, nose, and lips. Moreover, sculptural studies have shown earrings are the most common type of body modification (Waugh, 2007). For instance, although it is a common practice for people to wear earrings, clinicians have reported patients with single or multiple earrings on various parts of the body (Waugh, 2007). Remarkable exceptions are the practice of penis piercing by some popular tribes in Borneo, Southeast Asia (Ferguson, 1999).
Once regarded as low class or dangerous symbols, body art began to be seen as trendy and dazzling in the 1990s (Irwin, 2000). In recent times there has been resurgence in body
modification in the West dating back to about three decades (Adams, 2009). Most notable is the increased rate at which people acquire body art on their skin and other parts of the body (noses, ears, eyebrow, tongues, and navels) (Laumann & Derick, 2006). Dermatological studies have revealed that about one-third of the US adult populace has a tattoo and 14% a body piercing (Laumann & Derick, 2006). Moreover, the Pew Research Center (2010) in the US reports that 38% of 18 to 29-year-old Americans have a tattoo, of which 30% are described as visible.
Interestingly, Laumann and Derick (2006) estimated that 30% of the US adult population has a tattoo, a body piercing, or some combination of the two.
In terms of body piercing, prevalence reports have ranged between 4-56% (Armstrong, Roberts, Owen, & Koch, 2004; Laumann & Derick, 2006; Skegg, Nada-Raja, Paul, & Skegg, 2007; Wohlrab, Stahl, Rammsayer, & Kappeler, 2007). In a representative sample of adults in Britain, a survey estimated that 10% of all respondents had piercings at spots other than the earlobe (Bone, Ncube, Nichols, & Noah, 2008). It is likely, however, that prevalence rates are higher among select samples, including young adults (Schorzman, Gold, Downs, & Murray, 2007; Suris, Jeannin, Chossis, & Michaud, 2007). Similarly, an international chain of body piercing parlours (Gauntlet) in California, New York, and Paris reports at least about 30,000 demands for piercings each year (Michaela Grey, personal communication, June 17, 1997, as cited in Grief et al., 1999). Grief et al. (1999) also reported that 51% of the respondents in their study had body piercings and the earliest age to have initial piercing was 11 whereas the oldest at the time of their first piercing was 42.
Unfortunately, obtaining accurate figure for the prevalence of body art in Africa is difficult if not impossible (even though there are a number of people wearing body arts), due to lack of research on body art in the African context. Consequently, a true indication of the scale
of the problem and its potential implications in the African context remains difficult to estimate. Yet evidence suggests that in Nigeria, awareness on the prevalence of body art among undergraduate students of the University of Ibadan is 95.2% (Ezeibekwe, Ojedokun, & Aderinto, 2016). In Ghana, Van-Ess (2013) in his study of HIV/AIDs among prisoners revealed that about 20 percent had body art before going to prison whereas 0.5 percent had theirs during their custodial term. In August 2013, XYZ news reported that 20 female students from T.I Ahmadiyya Senior High School in the Ashanti region have been sent home as a result of their body art (“20 SHS girls sacked”, 2013). These and other anecdotal evidence suggest the prevalence of body art in Ghana or Africa.
There exist several reasons behind the wearing of body art. For example, anthropologists have described body modification as a way of classifying oneself as being affiliated to a particular group; a religious sect, a tribe (an ethnic group), or gang; of symbolizing one’s financial or marital status; or even as a way of enhancing the body (Myers, 1992). As cited by Ellis (2015), body arts are personal choice and there are varied reasons why people wear them. They can be` worn for aesthetic reasons or to derive a sense of empowerment over surviving a terrible ordeal, such as breast cancer or covering a scar. They can be applied in remembrance of a loved one or to identify with, or show affiliation with, a particular group such as gang or club (Mendez, 2016).
Some research evidence also points to cultural motives to obtaining body art. For instance, Grief et al. (1999) revealed that 90% respondents reported continual satisfaction with their tattoos. Antoszewski, Sitek, Fijałkowska, Kasielska, and Kruk-Jeromin (2010) in a study in Lodz (Poland) suggested some motives for wearing body art may include the desire to enhance one’s self, aesthetic value, peer pressure, and subculture affiliation. In Germany, Stirn and Hinz
(2008) reported different motivation for wearing body art: anticipated feeling of pain, pressure to conform, the dire need to get over undesirable life experiences, the desire to change one’s personality, and yearning to attain equivalence between feelings of embodiment and real body.
Moreover, in Kenya, Nyambura, Waweru and Nyamache (2013) reported that body art serves as a means of indicating a person’s place in a community, life transition, a type of trend or a mark of special occasion. Thus, these trends indicate how one’s cultural background and upbringing can affect the motive for acquiring a body art (Hill, 2016). Meanwhile, some studies (e.g., Brooks, Woods, Knight & Shrier, 2003; Tate & Shelton, 2008) have also shown a linkage between personality and substance abuse.
Arguably, it stands to reason that there is no doubt about the link between personality type and body modification (Nathanson, Paulhus & Williams, 2006). Tate and Shelton (2008) in their comparison between body modified and non-body modified on personality traits found that participants adorned with tattoos scored higher on agreeableness and conscientiousness. In a recent study, Ajayi and Ifeoluwa (2014) found that there exists a link between personality and body modification. Thus, a significant relationship exists between neuroticism and body modification. Also associated with body modification is the use and abuse of drugs and related criminal activities. There has been a reported linkage between substance abuse and body modification; for example, Brooks et al. (2003) found that substance use is common among people with body modification. Moreover, people with body art are more likely to be involved in risky life styles than those with no body art; they are engaged in activities like drug use, violence and suicide (Carroll, Riffenburgh, Roberts, & Myhre, 2002).
Despite its value in different cultures and associated determinants, body modification is linked with health complications. Essentially, the methods of conducting these modifications
have raised a lot of concern, thus both tattoo and piercing use needles that cuts the skin. Anderson (1992, p.207) a dermatologist, who had many encounters with patients with body arts, lamented that there was “little or no regulation of the training of tattooists, the sterilization of tattooing instruments, the screening of customers, or the inspection of tattoo parlours” (as cited in Armstrong, 2005).
Studies have also reported problems such as allergic contact dermatitis, scarring and keloid formation, bleeding and infection (Holbrook, Minocha & Laumann, 2012). Høgsberg, Hutton Carlsen and Serup (2013) reported complaints that were associated with tattooing after some months. Among the reported complications, skin destruction and itching were common. Other recalled complications that were reported include ulceration, redness and swelling, long healing, fever and infection. In addition to reports of infection and other sicknesses, Armstrong, Koch, Saunders, Roberts, and Owen (2007) cited psychosocial problems associated with body modification such as low levels of happiness, low self-esteem, disappointment and embarrassment. A number of studies have also shown how people with body art are stigmatized. In his findings, Mendez (2016) reported negative attitudes (stigma) towards people of the tattooed individuals when their tattoos were visible.
