Megan Fox removes Monroe tattoo: a do or a don't?

News from the entertainment world emerged today that bombshell actress Megan Fox was in the process of removing a large tattoo of icon Marilyn Monroe from her forearm. Yahoo's The Buzz Log reported that Fox regretted getting the tattoo of Monroe as she stated to Italian magazine Amica: "I'm removing it. It is a negative character, as she suffered from personality disorders and was bipolar. I do not want to attract this kind of negative energy in my life." While she once stated that the Monroe tattoo was meant to remind her of Hollywood's pitfalls, she now feels differently. Monroe was indeed chewed up and spit out by the film industry and Fox didn't want to suffer the same fate. Now, as she seemingly becomes a more popular, mainstream actress herself (a bombshell not unlike Monroe) she clearly wants to distance herself from the tragic icon. So, is a tattoo a do or a don't? Would you permanently ink yourself with a meaningful statement or image? Or would it be a regret?

Many celebrities and everyday people have tattooed themselves with phrases and images that have meaning for them. Not just heavy metal bands have tattoos but even people like Reese Witherspoon, Bristol Palin, Keith Urban and Justin Bieber (is that legal??) have tattooed themselves with ink that means something to them. Lady Gaga has a Rainer Maria Rilke quote tattooed on her left arm, but admits that her father has requested that she only tattoo one side of her body, leaving the other "normal." While Gaga is a grown woman capable of making decisions about her body and life, her dad doesn't sound unlike many parents whose kids are excited to permanently modify their bodies.

And Fox isn't the first celebrity to have the desire to remove a tattoo she regretted. Johnny Depp famously had ex-girlfriend Winona Ryder's name removed from his body, creatively removing the "na" from her name to leave a tattoo reading "Wino Forever." Charlie Sheen and ex-wife Denise Richards had one another's names removed when their relationship went south. Even Britney Spears, she of many regrettable moments, had a Hebrew tattoo removed from her neck.

Celebrities, whose bodies are part of their business, have real reason to want to remove images that make it difficult to get jobs. After all, make-up can cover up a great deal, but it's a hassle for an up and coming, unestablished actor to sell themselves if covered in tattoos. Bodies covered in art lead an audience to have a certain perception and it can be considered a limitation to an actor who wants to create a serious reputation based upon acting. Perhaps Megan Fox wants to be seen as a more serious actress and believes that a very large tattoo of a legendary, unstable actress is a limitation. She is certainly making a statement about the way she wants to be portrayed in the media by removing it.

When I first read this blurb, as a fan of Monroe and a someone who sympathizes with people dealing with depression, I was a bit irked. After all, Marilyn Monroe, for all of her faults, was an actress who did work hard to gain respect in such films as Some Like It Hot and The Misfits. She, according to some, suffered from bipolar disorder and struggled with depression throughout her life, but I feel that Fox's characterization of her as a "negative character" is unkind. This statement says more of Megan Fox's character than Monroe's: it shows insecurity and a need to prove to the public that she is valid. I mean no disrespect to Fox here, but Marilyn Monroe must've meant something to her at one time or she wouldn't have chosen to tattoo Monroe's image onto her am.

Getting a tattoo (or removing one) is a personal choice and one that should be carefully considered. For years I've toyed with the idea of getting a small one myself and, given the opportunity at this moment, might go for it! But one thing I know for sure: I know I would choose the image or words carefully, for I will carry these with me for life.