A few of you have pointed out some of the new models have lower back tattoos. I know tattoos are hugely popular right now, particularly with people under age 40. I live in Southern California where lots of people have lots of large tattoos covering significant portions of their body. When our family went back east to New York City and Boston, we saw far fewer and smaller tattoos on people. Certainly a lot less of the sleeve type so I think the popularity is certainly regional.
I found a couple of different groups of statistics on the demographics of tattoos from Wikipedia:
In September 2006, the Pew Research Center conducted a telephone survey which found that 36% of Americans ages 18–25, 40% of those 26-40 and 10% of those 41-64 had a tattoo. In January 2008, a survey conducted online by Harris Interactive estimated that 14% of all adults in the United States have a tattoo, just slightly down from 2003, when 16% had a tattoo. Among age groups, 9% of those ages 18–24, 32% of those 25-29, 25% of those 30-39 and 12% of those 40-49 have tattoos, as do 8% of those 50-64. Men are just slightly more likely to have a tattoo than women (15% versus 13%)
I'm in my forties so I missed out on getting a tattoo but I'm sure if I was in my twenties today I'd most likely have one. Do you think the Lululemon models with visible tattoos makes a difference to their customers, especially the new ones? Do you think it makes the company seem more contemporary or more downscale or maybe both? I am interested in hearing your opinion. I'm a huge fan of the design and function of the clothes so I guess I don't care too much as long as the tattoos the models are sporting are somewhat discreet. If they start looking like Michelle McGee (the "other woman" in Sandra Bullock's marriage) then I guess I might be a little turned off.