Galen

@El Dolmago, I don't know if my dermatologist is gonna be all that helpful if I decide to go the removal route. Not even sure if she'll have any info about the efficacy (or lack thereof) or potential dangers of laser removal, especially UV tattoo removal, even though her specialty is in laser therapies. As for surgical removal ... I haven't really thought about that at all. I guess if there are health risks associated with early UV inks, it might be something to consider. Thanks for your thoughts. Wow, @omeletta,thanks for the link to the other thread. Really appreciate you digging it up for me. Some useful info in there, and on a side note, it's both comforting and disturbing to know there are others who have experienced something similar.

Hey, this info actually kicked off a search that ended up making some plausible sense out of why the thing wasn't visible at the derma exam, so, yeah -- many thanks!

I'm trying to focus more on the logistics than the backstory, but, yeah, basically someone did this without my knowledge or consent. I know who, and roughly when, but I was pretty young and there was a lot of other crazy stuff going on for me. I guess getting poked in the neck just didn't register as memorable in comparison to the more flamboyantly weird things that were happening in my life at the time, lol! I had a bit of a wild ride up until my mid-twenties, but since then I've kinda had the perfect life: small, uneventful, and full of love, laughter, and contentment. You know what they say ... I wouldn't go back and relive it, but I also wouldn't change a thing.

Apparently it really is a UV tattoo, at least insofar as it's a deliberate, permanent mark, with discernible meaning, made by injecting some sort of UV-reactive ink under the skin. Certainly not a tattoo in the sense of a tattoo being a piece of art that one chooses to receive from a tattoo artist, though, heh. Funny you should suggest the dermatologist, since this whole thing started with her seeing a faint scar on the back of my neck. Interestingly, it didn't fluoresce under the fancy dermatological black-light, but it does become visible under a cheap "party" black-light. Haven't really thought about removal ... at this point it's more of an interesting puzzle that I'm just trying to figure out. The dermatologist was actually pretty clueless. It was only through my own online searching that I learned there was such a thing as a UV tattoo (which is why I thought it might make sense to ask here). I've been talking with the artist who did my tattoo about ten years ago -- the [non-UV] tattoo I chose to get, I mean, lol -- and she's been great: really respectful and helpful. She's checking with one of her connections in the medical field to see if they have any ideas about the stuff that she couldn't explain herself. I'm also in the process of contacting some other folks who were doing tattoos in the mid-80s and who might have thoughts about how someone might've done the UV thing before it was officially a thing. If neither of these pan out, then, yeah, my next step will be trying to reach out to someone who specializes in tattoo removal -- I imagine they see all kinds of crazy stuff, and might have some theories.

You know, I came to this forum from what I thought was a really respectful place, knowing that I was knocking at the door of a tight-knit community and culture, and that I'd be putting out questions that would probably seem stupid and weird. I tried to be as open as I could about the reasons that brought me here, without crossing the line into TMI, hoping that by doing so I'd be able to convey why it would be worth your time to consider them. I tried to keep the desperation out of my tone, although in truth the only reason I was willing to step out of my super boring, middle-aged, non-tattooed comfort zone to even dare to approach you all is because I actually am sort of desperate to figure out what the F*** this newly-discovered mark on me is all about, and because I figured a forum with a bunch of folks who knew a shit-ton about tattoos might be a good place to start. I kinda figured I'd get mocked or teased a bit about the weirdness of my questions, but I didn't expect to be ridiculed and challenged over the reasons I gave for having the questions in the first place. So I revised my original post to remove all references to the creepy circumstances behind why these questions are important to me, and now it just looks like I'm an entitled bitch demanding random information. And now, having written this, I just look like a super emo and whiny entitled bitch, LOL. So I'm in something of a bind here. I'm not sure what I should have done differently, but I'm starting to get the feeling that I either came to the wrong place or was just too inept in how I approached it. In general I'm pretty patient and good-natured, but I guess this subject is too emotionally loaded for me to continue hanging around feeling stupid and laughed-at, so I think it makes sense for me to gather up my oversensitive self and make a respectful, albeit melodramatic, exit now. Since I'm incapable of making a graceful one, ha. Special thanks to Devious6: I really appreciated your kind response. Best of luck to all of you in your respective journeys. May all your tattoos be well-chosen, well-designed, well-executed, and in the end, well-loved.

Thanks for the welcome, and lol, yeah, I was stupid to have started with the story behind why I'm asking the questions. It completely derails attention away from the questions themselves. (A belated thanks to Dan for helping me realize this, ha.) Ah well, live and learn, right? I think from now on I'll go with the alien abduction explanation!

So embarrassing to have to edit out my own double-post. Ayiyi.

Edited out because I'm going about this the wrong way, lol. Sorry!

Edited out because I'm going about this the wrong way, lol. Sorry!

Hi all, At the risk of being one of those annoying people who only come here seeking information and have little to offer in the way of anything intelligent to say about tattoos, I joined this forum in order to ask a few odd questions about UV tattoos. I've edited my original post in hopes of keeping the focus on these questions: Does anyone know if UV tattooing was something people did or knew about back in the mid-80s? Is it possible for a UV tattoo to remain visible under UV light thirty years after being applied? Or ... inked? I don't know the best verb, sorry! Are there other ways besides using a tattoo machine that someone could have done a UV tattoo? And if so, would that result in a weird, blobby looking tattoo? Is there any explanation for why a UV tattoo would glow under one type of black-light, and not another? Responses much appreciated, thanks!