The native Maori people of New Zealand have tattooed their faces for centuries. They had a complex warrior culture before the arrival of Europeans, and suffered under early colonialism, but have experienced a cultural revival since the 60′s.
The marks are called moko, and are etched with chisels instead of needles to leave grooves along with the ink. The true form is sacred, unique to each person, and distinct from European tattoos that mimic that traditional style.
There arent many pictures non combat related that look this badass
Actually most
Tā moko are done with modern tattoo equipment these days, but some people get them done the traditional way. And, as others have said, they’re not for Non-
Māori, as they have specific meanings and significance. If you want a tattoo with Māori
style, you can get a
kirituhi. These avoid any designs associated with particular tribes or famous people you’re not related to.
Kirituhi is a Māori style tattoo either made by a non-Māori tattooer, or made for a non-Māori wearer. Kirituhi has mana of it’s own and is a design telling the unique story of the wearer in the visual language of Māori art and design. Kiri means ‘skin’, and tuhi means ‘to write, draw, record, adorn or decorate with painting’.
Kirituhi is not restricted to only Māori people, and it is a way for Māori to share our cultural arts with people from around the world in a respectful manner, and for non-Māori artists to enjoy our beautiful art form as well. I happily do kirituhi for my clients around the world and it is a privilege to do such work for them.
Kirituhi is no lesser an artform than moko, however it is different and I believe these differences must be acknowledged and respected, so that the integrity of our taonga Māori – moko, is maintained around the world.
Moko is uniquely Māori and it is strictly reserved to be done by Māori, for Māori.
If either the recipient or tattooer do not have Māori whakapapa, then the resulting design is a Māori Style tattoo or kirituhi, NOT moko. The word moko originated from the Māori atua (god) of volcanic activity and earthquakes, Rūaumoko – therefore the origin of tā moko is divine and sacred – to me this is no small thing, nor should it be dismissed.
As my mentor once told me, ‘moko is about 99% culture, and 1% tattoo’.
I
had to go to some pretty dark places, but that’s because that’s where he
is. He was just incredibly sad and lonely and the more successful he
became the more lonely he became. He used to say the sunset was the
lonesomest time of the day, and that’s the mark of a man who’s not
happy.
Morality and righteousness is based on intent, love, and in giving; yet, how is it that we as humans have come to view the act of sex with a different set of arbitrary laws? Specifically pigeonholed as an act between man and women and with righteousness based on a unsystematic number of people we have slept with, we as humans have come to bind society with a set of laws largely advantageous to a group of people with the other heavily antagonized and chastised: the imbalance between man and woman.
Sex is a powerful act of intent to create: the creation of pleasure, creation of love, and ultimately the creation of life. It connects and syncs two beings emotionally, physically, and mentally and is the strongest expression of love that exists in this World. The Buddha advised personal conviction as to how his followers should uphold themselves in personal relationships rather than with specific commandments based on relationship because every relationship is highly individualistic and such a varying experience, to where one binding law wouldn’t be able to educate for the many variables of intimate relationships.
Whether between man and women, man and man, or woman and woman; love is your own personal choice, and love is the only language that is understood universally. Before any laws created by man, religion, and culture; the universe has always held us under the morals of love. Is it with the right intent? Is it based on giving? Is it based on love?
Namaste,
Forrest Curran
Get your free ebook guide to loving yourself as a daily resource below:
The amendment appears on a funding bill for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education. If it remains in the final bill, the amendment would cut 15% of federal adoption funding to states and localities that penalize adoption agencies that refuse to place children in families that conflict with the agency’s “sincerely held religious beliefs or convictions.”
The amendment also bars the federal government from refusing to work with adoption agencies that discriminate.
The vote in the committee was 29-23, along party lines, with Rep. Scott Taylor (R-VA) the lone Republican to vote against the amendment.
“House Republicans are pandering to their far-right base at the expense of LGBTQ people and children in need of a home,” said Democratic National Committee (DNC) LGBTQ Media Director Lucas Acosta.
“Rather than focusing on empowering families or uniting children with their parents, Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee voted to give child welfare agencies a license to discriminate against qualified potential parents.”
Acosta added, “Across the country, LGBTQ candidates are running for office and taking a stand against the Trump-GOP agenda, which seeks to roll back the progress we have made. In November, voters will stand together in the face of this bigotry and hate and elect Democrats up and down the ticket.”
In addition to LGBTQ people and same-sex couples, the amendment would also impact interfaith couples, single parents, married couples in which one prospective parent has previously been divorced, or other qualified parents to whom an agency could have an objection.
rip tumblr 