Posts tagged gauntlet

Point 89: The Gay Ear

Comments Off on Point 89: The Gay Ear read Features, Industry History, Issue 89, Lifestyle

Lynn Loheide & Margo Dellaquilla

In piercing studios around the country the question is still asked today, “Does one side have any special meaning? You know, what ear is the gay ear?” Despite changing times and modern progress many people still associate piercings—particularly a single piercing in the lobe—as a symbol of one’s sexuality. We’ve all given a little internal eye roll when we have to field this question in our studios and most of us have a carefully prescribed response. any of us may not understand the history of this concept. It’s actually quite fascinating to take a look behind how one specific piercing developed such recognition as a gay symbol.

To find out how an ear piercing could carry such symbolism we need to look back to the ‘70s and ‘80s in America. A different time when it was still perilous to be LGBTQIA (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, intersex, and asexual or allied) and publicly out, and there were no legal or social protections for people who were. Many people lived in fear of losing their jobs, homes, families, or being outright attacked. The AIDs crisis was beginning and both hate and fear concerning anything gay were at an all-time high.

People gathered in secret bars, hung around dark trails in local parks, and used various forms of code based on location to subtly tell people they were gay. These codes were a form of protection, a small way to tell people in-the-know what their preferences were without outing themselves and potentially changing, or even ending, their lives. We, as piercers, generally know and love the hanky code (raise your hand if you own a purple one!) This same philosophy also helped to coin“The Gay Ear”. Born from these codes is a phrase few now remember as familiar, “Left is right and right is wrong” (“wrong” here meaning gay). This cultural phrase spread across communities in an era when piercing was just blossoming. Women were daring to wear second and third earlobe piercings and a particularly rebellious person may pierce their cartilage. This phrase cemented in many minds that the singular right lobe piercing on a man was synonymous with being gay. We can even look at this New York Times article from 19911 that mentions a piercing in the right ear as a “discreet symbol”    of one’s sexuality. We must remember this was a time when discretion was, for some, life or death. Like a game of  telephone,  this  phrase  spread,  and small changes happened along the way. In some areas, it was reversed, and the left ear was  a signifier. Others changed the script  entirely:  both ears could signify one was bi or trans, and a few on one ear had specific meanings in a local scene. As the phrase became  more  widespread  and used as a way of outing folks, some opted to pierce the opposite ear associated in their area to remain hidden. All of this served to muddle the waters until no one  could  agree  which  ear  was, in fact, “the gay ear”.

It wasn’t long before that phrase became lost, and many people forgot which ear meant what, as if any ear ever meant anything. The internet, and even before that the “Ask x” columns and library question cards, were filled with men agonizing over which was the ear they were “supposed” to pierce. How could they wear the adornments they desired while maintaining their heterosexuality; or, perhaps, secretly inquiring which they could pierce to flaunt their homosexuality. Over time the meaning seemed to matter less and less as piercings became more popular and many folks cared not what anyone else thought. Their adornments were for them and them alone. As early as the ‘90s people had forgotten the meaning as piercings were now more about punk rock and youthful rebellion than an underground symbol. Time passed and it became ok to be out. We didn’t need to hide behind antiquated codes or symbols; we could be out and proud!

While discrimination still exists in many shapes and forms, even now in 2020, fortunately, we don’t need to hide as much as we did then. That being said, education and reclamation of what was once used to hurt or oppress us can be a powerful way to stand in the face of discrimination. This is a great piece of history to share with other piercers, clients, and friends, to help remove the stigma and keep our history alive. After all, given our shared history, all piercings are a little bit gay!

Photos of Gauntlet founder and out gay man Jim Ward from issue 24 of Piercing Fans International Quarterly (1985). Jim acquired his first ear piercing in 1969 when the right ear was very much the traditional “gay” ear. Like many gay men of that time, he still opted to pierce the left ear. The initial piercing was a bit low; sometime in Gauntlet’s early years, he did a second one above it for which he designed these unique jewelry pieces. Sadly, they disappeared when Gauntlet closed in 1998. After he moved to San Francisco in the early 1990s, he finally had his right ear pierced.

Point 85: Back in the Day

Comments Off on Point 85: Back in the Day read Features, Industry History, Issue 85

by Elayne Angel

If you were not present, it would be hard to imagine how incredibly different “the field” of body piercing was in the 1980s, when I landed my job as a professional piercer and manager at Gauntlet, Inc.

At the time, piercing was some years away from being an actual industry. As far as we know, there was still just that one specialty studio in the country (and possibly the world)! Body piercing was all but unheard of. Literally—most people had simply never heard of it. The general public thought that women’s earlobes were the only site for such ornamentation, and maybe some noses in exotic, distant lands. Body piercing, when it was perceived at all, was viewed as underground, radical, and exceedingly deviant.

Even the National Tattoo Association (NTA) did not welcome Gauntlet at their conventions. Despite multiple attempts to rent a booth, they refused to offer the simple courtesy of a reply. They felt that piercing was outlandish and would give tattooing a “bad reputation.”

We had a tattoo artist client who used to buy jewelry from Gauntlet and do some piercings on the side. He confided that if his tattoo artist boss knew that he was pierced, and that he was performing piercings on others, he would be fired for being a pervert!

When I first became employed at Gauntlet, the clientele was still primarily gay leathermen (like its owner/founder, Jim Ward himself), and others from the BDSM community. Jim Ward is the person who essentially brought piercing out of the bedroom and dungeon. Initially, “kinky” people who were exploring the limits of their bodies were about the only ones engaging in piercing. We put holes in ears here and there, but mostly we pierced nipples and genitals, and the occasional septum on a willing slave or daring dominant.

At that time, piercing was very much about sex, eroticism, sensation, and enhancement. Piercings were for function, and the aesthetics were somewhat secondary. It used to be more about how a piercing felt than how it looked.

Then piercing got some media attention, including an article in the National Enquirer, with the sensational headline “Bizarre New Fashion Fad Turns Folks into Human Pincushions.” As melodramatic as this tabloid fodder was, it caught the attention of a lot of interested parties. That coverage was definitely responsible for putting tongue piercing before the public eye and its popularity soared afterward! Tongue piercing had not been in the repertoire of usual puncture sites in those days. At. All.

In addition to the National Enquirer piece and other print articles, we got a fair bit of television coverage too, including CNN, After Hours, MTV, French TV, and Japanese TV. An old syndicated news show called Inside Report filmed a noteworthy segment at Gauntlet in the late 1980s. I find it very illustrative of that era.

I’m rockin’ a piercing-purple skirt suit. The blazer’s padded shoulders set off my long curly, dyed-black Mohawk. As I speak there’s a text overlay on the screen reading, HOLE-EE COW!

Me: One of the other new piercings that is getting very popular, and it is rather painless to have done and very erotic: it’s the tongue piercing!

The poofy-haired anchorwoman, clad in a sassy leopard print dress (with massive shoulder pads), opines: “For most people, even getting their ears pierced is a traumatic experience. But imagine having your nipple or your navel pierced?! Body piercing is becoming a booming business, and not just with rock and rollers or radicals. This painful fad is becoming popular even with the yuppie crowd! Inside Report’s Angela Shelly shows us some folks who have more holes in their bodies than Swiss cheese!”

Cut to a Mötley Crüe music video with reporter’s voice-over: “It’s kind of your job when you’re a rock star. You’re supposed to shock people. Like Axl Rose of Guns n’ Roses, Nikki Sixx of Mötley Crüe, these two have a lot in common. No, not music; nipples! [Cut to close up image of a pierced male nipple with a captive ring.] Both of the rockers have recently gotten their nipples pierced at this shop [image of the Gauntlet storefront] in West Hollywood, California.

“But don’t think piercing is just for the raunchy and famous. A lot of regular people…and a few irregulars are pierced in places you never thought of—take navels.” This as they show a preppy short-haired young man getting his eyebrow pierced, then one of the Gauntlet staff strutting down the street in SM-fashionable leather and chains, sporting septum and navel piercings.

Next, they interview a sincere young piercee about her new navel piercing as she is bouncing a toddler on her hip. “It’s a pretty exotic place, I thought; something out of the normal. Not everybody has one.” [Though, of course, some years later, nearly anybody might have one!]

This show actually recorded my very first eyebrow piercing. Once the fixed bead ring was inserted and closed (of course we didn’t have any NeoMetal curves back then), I looked over at the client and said—in all seriousness— “You are a wild man!” Yep, piercing was quite different in those days.

Elayne’s experimental wrist piercing

Soon piercing started to catch on with entertainers, artists, musicians, and others. Being located in Southern California, Gauntlet was well positioned to handle that clientele. In the late 1980s (coinciding with the release of the Re/Search book Modern Primitives), more varied types of people became interested in body art and modification. They wanted to decorate different areas including more ear and facial work, and surface piercings.

Two photos of Joe Ruby of Borneo Joe and Flaming Bones Jewelry. Many of his facial piercings placements were totally pioneering (and wildly attention getting) at the time. It is fantastic to see that he still wears them to this day.

There simply was no existing body of knowledge to draw from to fulfill many of these new requests. So, we moved forward as best we could, applying principles from our stock of “traditional” piercings whenever possible. It was an era of experimentation, informal research, and trial and error. And, yes…there were errors. Some piercings didn’t heal well and left scars. Fortunately, I have no real catastrophes to report (except for the disaster described on page 119 of The Piercing Bible, called “The Worst Piercing Story,” which is about my own cheek piercings).

We were always honest about our experience (or lack thereof) for any atypical requests. But when the customers were up for trying, we did our utmost. It was acceptable to just… attempt something new—nearly anything. We didn’t yet know what the boundaries and possibilities were, so we had to feel for them. We pushed, to find out what worked. Compared to today, there was relatively little expected by our clients, which facilitated this process. If they were willing to ultimately walk away with a scar for the chance at a new piercing, we gave it a go.

The truth is, we did some foolish stuff. And once that initial period of exploration ran its course, I pretty much stuck to the piercings that routinely healed successfully and let go of the rest. I suppose it is ironic that I’m now viewed as a “conservative” piercer, given these origins.

But my current attitude springs from having experimented a lot in my formative years.

Some of our early efforts come to mind.    A number of them turned into very popular piercings; others, not so much.

In the 1970s, the first piercing I’d done on myself (other than an ear) was through a pinch of tissue just below the prominent bone on the outside of my left wrist. I was in high school at the time and was afraid someone would see it and send me to the looney bin, so I kept it in for just a few weeks before abandoning it. After joining the Gauntlet team, I thought it would be fun to reprise this piercing, so I had a colleague hold the forceps while I pushed the needle through. Then they did the jewelry insertion for me: a 14 ga 3⁄8″ gold captive bead ring. I wore it for some months and it healed quite well given the minimal tissue, and the frequent handwashing and glove wearing required by my work. Ultimately, I found it impractical and gave it up.

I also thought it would be neat to have a hand-web piercing, which I’d seen in issue #23 of Jim Ward’s Piercing Fans International Quarterly Magazine (PFIQ). Somehow that settled in too, in spite of the Betadine and water soaks I used to “help it heal.” I had it for several years before it began to migrate and had to be abandoned.

Innovations were tossed around and regularly tried out on the very willing staff. The lower central labret was already somewhat established, but one of my employees (Rebecca L.) got the idea for a midline piercing above her upper lip, and that was the first philtrum piercing I can recall.

Another staffer (piercer Jen D.) wanted her forehead pierced horizontally, as close to the hairline as possible. I didn’t think a ring or straight barbell would work well, and curves were years from becoming readily available. So, I got the bright idea (ha!) to make a flexible “barbell” by filing the seam off of some plastic weed-eater line with a jewelry file. I figured out a creative way to melt and flatten the plastic ends with a lighter to hold some beads on. Amazingly, it healed just fine and she later put in metal jewelry. Jen wore it for years, and to my knowledge, indefinitely.

An employee from the jewelry division wanted to get an ear cartilage placement that “not everyone has,” so I evaluated his anatomy. I decided to frame the prominent horizontal ridge near his face, toward the upper region of his ear. We called it a “Niler” as his last name was Niles. Later, Erik Dakota would dub this placement a “rook” piercing.

Then there were other inventive things to be done with piercings. I thought it would be cool to have a vampire bite scar on the side of my neck. So, I took a long straight barbell (12 gauge, about 11⁄4″ in length) and while a colleague held the tissue in some forceps, I pierced it myself, and inserted the jewelry. The intention was to leave it in temporarily, and for it to not heal at all well. Somehow, minimal scarring resulted, which is probably for the best.

Believe it or not, I wasn’t the only one to try this “vampire piercing.” Joe Ruby of Borneo Joe/ Flaming Bones jewelry was an early frequent visitor in the studio, and he also got one. Many of his facial piercing placements were totally pioneering (and wildly attention-getting) at the time. It is fantastic to see that he still wears them to this day.

In addition to performing experimental piercings, some of the circumstances surrounding them were unusual as well. I recall a few topless after-hours, invitation-only piercing parties. In fact, my forward helix—the first of its kind, as far as we know—was done at one such event. It was performed by Crystal (now Clayton) Cross, pierced from the interior, into a cork on the front. A small bead ring was the initial jewelry.

Elayne, right, with Crystal (now Clayton) Cross

I also have very fond memories of a “first cleaning” party that took place in my large home shower, only a mile from Gauntlet’s door. About a half a dozen of us bathed together and washed our tender new piercings with Hibiclens surgical scrub. Believe me when I tell you, that harsh soap was actually a big improvement from the agonizing rubbing-alcohol-on-cotton-swabs aftercare method I used for my nipple piercings back in 1981!

Stretching cartilage (or any large gauge hole in that tissue) was also pretty revolutionary at that time; most enlarged piercings at that point were Prince Alberts. For my conch piercing, a 10-gauge matte-finish charcoal ring was selected as the initial jewelry (ever so unwisely). What agony! But it healed, and within nine months I’d somehow stretched it enough to fit in a 4-gauge double-flared eyelet without damaging the tissue.

A memorable and unique man came to Gauntlet in the ‘80s with a number of highly unusual requests for the times. He went by the name Erl Van Aken (RIP), and he got the first bridge piercing, which we dubbed an “Erl.” He also got the first neck surface piercing (nape). He wore both of these for many, many years. Less well known was his foray into axillary piercings. Though he was a very physically active man, Erl thought it would be a good idea to pierce the folds at the front and rear  of his underarm creases. Though I tried to discourage him, Erl was a very persistent and persuasive person. I eventually placed 14ga 5⁄8″ rings there, front and back, bilaterally. Although he didn’t wear those piercings for as long as his others, they healed despite his inventive care regimen: twice daily applications of Bacardi 151 rum!

An adorable and effervescent young gal named Madison was the first to come in requesting a surface piercing at the front of her neck, which we labeled accordingly. We placed a ring in it and she wore the piercing for years, stating that she never had problems with it. Amazing!

I also recall a gent named Chet, who requested a single cheek piercing. He brought in a spent Magnum .357 bullet shell casing, and we had the jewelry department slice off the inscribed back portion of it to make a threaded end for the front of his piercing. Once the project was complete, he thought it looked like he had a bullet in his face. That was creative and…different. (I want to take this opportunity to clarify a common misconception: we did use internally threaded jewelry, even in those early days, for everything 14 gauge and thicker.)

I remember Dr. Jack Ward teaching a class on anatomy for piercers at an APP Conference in the 1990s. He entitled it: “Are We Good or Are We Lucky?” and frankly, I would have to say we were pretty lucky indeed. We didn’t use needles larger than 10 gauge (I still don’t), and generally pierced smaller than that. But we stuck them through some places that could have had less fortunate outcomes. I did a piercing on one of the staff members (Crystal) at the juncture of her face and earlobe, but have since learned that there is an artery present there that is usually quite large. That could have gone badly!

When I wasn’t at the shop or at home, I was out proselytizing about the joys of piercing to anyone who would listen. They often heard my message, as I made countless “converts.” My passion and enthusiasm were boundless, and the role of educator/liaison was one I undertook zealously. I still do….

During that period, the energy was electric, palpable, and intense, and it was evident that the era was somehow significant. My memories of that extraordinary time are incredibly fond, but frankly I’m relieved that my experimenting days are behind me. I’m so grateful to have been there, and happy to have returned to my roots, specializing in the piercings that were Gauntlet’s original stock in trade.

Disclaimer: This article is intended to accurately describe my personal recollections and professional experiences from many years ago. It is my sincere intention to be truthful, though we all know that human memory is sometimes fallible. Any errors are my own (and are inadvertent). Also, it is not my aim to seek credit for any particular piercings—just to relate some early history as I remember it.

Point 85: In the Beginning There was Gauntlet

Comments Off on Point 85: In the Beginning There was Gauntlet read Body Piercing Archives, Features, Industry History, Issue 85

by Jim Ward

Yes, humans have been piercing their bodies for millenia, so this title is not literally true.

But in 1975 when Gauntlet was born, except for a handful of fetishists, the western world had largely forgotten this part of its history. That year marked the beginning of a revival that has taken the planet by storm. Thanks to Gauntlet, piercing shops have become a staple of the urban landscape.

Many of you have read my book Running the Gauntlet and are familiar with so many of the photos it contains. For this issue of The Point, I’ve dug back into my personal archives and chosen a number of mostly unpublished photos from Gauntlet’s early years to share.

For the first three years of its existence, I conducted business from my dilapidated old home. The shop opened in 1978. I hope you enjoy this stroll down memory lane.

Doug Malloy in a candid moment
A young chap modeling the first incarnation of a Gauntlet t-shirt. I silk screened the design myself. At one point I attempted to dye some of them purple, but the widely available Rit dye faded rapidly to lavender.
Poet, performance artist, and out masochist Bob Flanagan in a 1982 video getting a Prince Albert and guiche piercing from Jim Ward. Shot by his mistress Sheree Rose, the video may be seen on the APPThePoint YouTube Channel. It should be viewed as an historical document and in no way
considered instructional.

My home on San Vicente Boulevard in West Hollywood where Gauntlet was born and from which I conducted business for three years prior to the opening of the studio.

Exterior view of the shop front
My secretary’s desk and work area. On the stool
bottom left is visible a layout board for an issue of
PFIQ
The showcase and my desk and work area.
Through the opening at the far right is the jewelry
making area. Seeing the ash tray on the display
counter, we forget that smoking was acceptable
in those days.
My friend Diane at the jeweler’s bench
in the opposite corner of the room is the piercing area shielded
by a folding screen on the right. This studio would not meet
today’s APP standards; but was acceptable at that particular
time
Me wearing a second generation Gauntlet T-shirt. It
was purple with a glittery gold design. The peacock wallpaper
raised a number of eyebrows, but finding anything
featuring our signature purple at that time was a challenge

Point 82: Michaela Grey

Comments Off on Point 82: Michaela Grey read Awards & Recognition, Features, Industry History, Issue 82

By Marina Pecorino, Point Editor

Michaela Grey in 1995. The photo was taken for PFIQ Issue 45 commemorating Gauntlet’s 20th Anniversary

Obviously, Jim Ward is widely regarded as the “father” of the modern, American piercing movement, but who is considered the mother? In my personal opinion, that  honorary title should go to Michaela Grey. At a piercing clinic in New York, Michaela met Jim Ward; she was a student at Sarah Lawrence at the time. Prior to this meeting, Michaela and her then girlfriend were performing piercings out of their dorm room, but Jim made such an impression on Michaela that she decided to move to San Francisco and seek an apprenticeship. In May 1991, Michaela was hired as a summer counter person at Gauntlet, and soon advanced into an apprenticeship position under Scott Shatsky and Karen Hurt.

An excerpt from Running the Gauntlet:

“By 1993 the mass proliferation of body piercing studios staffed with inadequately trained piercers was causing grave concern with health departments and legislators. In some places there was talk of outlawing body piercing altogether. We at Gauntlet had tried repeatedly to get others in the industry to police and regulate themselves, but with minimal success. It became apparent that unless we banded together and became proactive, we could very well find ourselves out of business. We knew that if body piercing were made illegal, the only piercers continuing to operate would be doing so clandestinely, and piercing clients would be no better off than they already were.

Any Gauntlet Senior Piercer who wanted to get their Master Piercer certification was required to undertake a special project. Michaela was ready to make this advancement, and her special project, the magnitude of which we didn’t realize at the time, was to attempt to create a network of responsible studios willing to work together with healthcare professionals and legislators to set reasonable standards for the industry and regulate rather than outlaw it. This became so time consuming that friction developed between Michaela and her coworkers. The store manager wanted to fire her. […]

Despite her rough edges, it was apparent to me that Michaela had too many things going for her to simply turn her out in the street. So rather than abandon her I made the decision to mentor her and take her on at corporate as my assistant. This gave her the time and freedom to work on a number of projects, including what eventually became the Association of Professional Piercers (APP). […]

In 1994 the State of California was poised to pass legislation (Assembly Bill 3787) that would regulate body piercing, tattooing, and permanent cosmetics. A handful of piercers from several studios began to network and strategize how best to assure that these forms of body modification were not outlawed. Those who met at the Gauntlet corporate office for those early meetings included Raelyn Gallina, several representatives from Body Manipulations, Nomad, and Primeval Body in L.A. Along with some of his students, including Idexa, Fakir also attended. The office was full. As the pending legislation grew closer to passing, a group got together and drove to Sacramento. Michaela spoke on behalf of the industry during one of the hearings for the bill. She also did a number of television interviews. The bill ultimately failed thanks to lobbying by the ear-piercing gun manufacturers. However, this did not end the threats to the industry, and the need for a professional organization to deal with them.

The APP founding members, left to right, Irwin Kane (Gauntlet), Raelyn Gallina, Vaughn (Body Manipulations), Michaela Grey (Gauntlet), Melisa Kaye (Body Manipulations), Richard Carter (Primeval Body), JoAnn Wyman (Body Manipulations), Elizabeth Brassil (Body Manipulations), Drew Ward (Gauntlet); kneeling, Blake Perlingieri (Nomad), Kristian White (Nomad)

Future meetings were held after hoursat the Market Street store. From these the APP came into being. Not surprisingly, there was much wrangling, many heated discussions, and some friction. Some of those who attended left in a huff never to return or to come back many years later. Blake Perlingieri helped Michaela with registering the organization for nonprofit status, opening a joint bank account for the funds, and starting its newsletter The Point. With the assistance of Ghadi Elias from Mastodon in San Diego, APP moved forward and organized its first board.”

Michaela served as the original Chair (later retitled “President”) of the Association of Professional Piercers, starting from its inception in 1994 until she transitioned to the International Liaison in June 1997. During this transition of the Board, in The Point: Issue 10, Kent Fazekas, incoming Chair, wrote the following about her:

“Michaela Grey. Words cannot express the amount of gratitude the APP has for you. The amount of work you have put forth toward the APP is remarkable. As chairperson of the APP your workload is enormous, and I can only imagine the amount of time per day you donate to the APP (I may be finding out real soon). You have a very pure heart Michaela and your actions show that you truly believe in the APP’s mission. We love you Michaela.”

During the fledgling years of the organization, in addition to her APP Chair responsibilities, she worked diligently to produce early issues of The Point. She also served as the co-editor for PFIQ, helping to redirect its focus from male/leather, to a more female friendly perspective. In PFIQ #45, Michaela wrote the following:

I do not discern between the experience of being pierced, the healing process, and the completed, integrated adornment; they are wholistic and inter-relative. Being pierced is a natural extension of my need to create an intentional environment for myself–a world of spiritual completeness, practicality, and uniqueness. I fiercely intend not to live an unexamined, blind life.

I started at the San Francisco Gauntlet in 1991. Prior to that, I spent two years as one of those uneducated hack piercers against whom I now crusade. My current responsibilities as an educator and media disseminator put me in the position of being able to make a real difference in the piercing experiences of others, for whom I am grateful. Piercing and other body-affirming practices are becoming ever more popular in defiance of an increasingly depersonalizing world. I am proud to be one of those spreading this message.

Michaela worked closely with Jim Ward to develop a piercer training curriculum for Gauntlet and co-author  a  written  manual called Responsible Body Piercing in 1993; she later became the director and primary instructor for these seminars, with other Gauntlet piercers co-teaching.

In 1998, prior to the existence of the President’s Award, the Board dedicated the “Jack Yount Memorial Certificate of Recognition” to Michaela, for her efforts in promoting excellence in professional piercing.

The Jack Yount Award, 1998

Due to friction with others in the industry because of her so called “conservative” views, Michaela stepped away from body modification to pursue a career in graphic design and production art. Later she went back to school for costume design and graduated from the Fashion Institute of Design and Merchandising (FIDM) in Los Angeles.

In 2005, the APP presented Michaela with a Lifetime Achievement award, stating that “her work to secure the stability of the [APP] in the early days were critical to its survival. Piercers have had the opportunity to speak to the regulations which govern them worldwide as a result of her efforts.” You can read more about this special award in  The Point: Issue 48.

This was originally intended to be an interview with Michaela Grey, but unfortunately, she declined the opportunity. She made it clear that she “left the industry due to gross persistent misogyny and disrespect for piercing’s history and elders” and as a result would prefer to keep her distance. Michaela is not alone in these feelings, and this underlying tone illustrates precisely why this issue of The Point is themed around the women in our industry, past and present.

From Brian Skellie:

Michaela knows that some of us commiserate with her for the rough times she had with APP, and how much I and many other people still hold her in high esteem. We should ensure our archive reflects Michaela with honor and respect as a person not just an integral past political figure. She worked tirelessly as an ally to our mission, no matter how uncomfortable or stressful it was. She took on so much in her role at 23 years old, put up with hard work and difficult debates along with the good, and much of it was thankless. Without Michaela, the APP could have just been a tiny, short lived CA endeavor. Thankfully she helped clear away some of the nonsense that gets in the way of the good work. There is much more to her personality and her work than the awards we gave her and back issues of The Point can illuminate.

We have kept in touch since her APP years. Michaela’s ever present wit shines in our interaction when I brought up the Archive and asked for her to reflect upon her involvement and share her ideas:

“Aside from the looming threat of ill-conceived legislation, I was forming the APP at the time I was running two Gauntlet piercer seminars a month. I observed a wide cross section of the piercers currently working, from folks I admired and respected to a lot of people I wouldn’t want piercing an apple juice carton with a straw. If I seemed excessively cautious it’s largely due to the truly scary folks I encountered in the seminars, and knowing that they represented a likely majority of the industry at the time (and sadly, probably still today).”

I believe her caution was sensible. She is skillfully self critical, and never needed my opinion or assistance. Some others at the time seemed to play the devil’s advocate and enjoy getting strong responses. This treatment of her efforts was lamentable. She should be remembered as a great gift to the trade. She saw video of the 20th Anniversary panel discussion and noted:

“I’m usually never thinking about that part of my life. It was very moving to see so many old cohorts gathered at that table to talk about the early days of the organization. All water under the bridge. I’m mostly pleasantly surprised. Allen’s mention of me was unexpected and got me a little misty. As he said, we butted heads often. It’s good to see that we both did it from love of the craft. It’s also interesting to see that some quandaries like “do we let crap jewelry manufacturers on the Expo floor” persist to the present day.”

Some companies have learned what it takes to make standard quality jewelry, and done well. Others still are dodging any light we shine on them, but we hope they will come around.

“I’m awed and humbled to see how the APP has grown. I’m also loving the international outreach! I have a number of the new Members from Mexico and Italy on my FB feed and it’s awesome to see it grow.”

Michaela with Jim Ward at the APP Banquet 2005 when she received the Lifetime Achievement Award

Point 81: Profile of a Responsible Piercer

Comments Off on Point 81: Profile of a Responsible Piercer read Features, Industry History, Issue 81

The following excerpt is from Responsible Body Piercing, the Gauntlet seminar training manual written by Michaela Grey and Jim Ward and first published in 1995. Reissued in 2016, copies of this historic document are available from runningthegauntlet-book.com

AN INTRODUCTION

When Gauntlet first came into being in 1975, who would have imagined the phenomenal popularity body piercing would be enjoying less than 20 years later? In response to the huge demand, people calling themselves “piercers” have been springing up all over. From tattoo shops to beauty salons, almost every city and town now has at least one so-called piercer in residence. A few of them are good; some do poor piercings but are at least clean, and some are just plain dangerous.

Presumably you are reading this because you want to become a piercer yourself, and it is hoped that you wish to become a responsible piercer. We have chosen to call this manual Responsible Body Piercing, NOT Professional Body Piercing. It is very important for you to understand that NO ONE can make you into a professional after a short course of study, and, in fact, we make no such claims. Experience has proven it takes between a year and a half and two years of supervised training for someone with aptitude to become a fully-qualified piercer. Anyone who leads you to believe that you are ready to start a piercing business after taking a weekend seminar and doing a few piercings is dishonest, irresponsible, and unethical. Professional piercers, like good health care workers, good hair stylists, or any other professionals, are not created overnight. They must all train and practice under  the  supervision of someone with more knowledge and experience. In  time they will gain the skills and confidence  necessary  to   win the trust of their clients  and make the piercing experience as untraumatic and painless as possible.

So what if you won’t be a professional by the time you finish this book. What is far more important is for you to start right now to be a responsible piercer. We encourage you to learn and practice your craft in an ethical, responsible, and, yes, professional way. Form in your mind an image of the professional you wish to be, and in time you will become that image.

This training manual is intended to provide a broad overview of the world of piercing, to teach the fundamentals of sterilization and hygiene, and to help you begin developing a safe and solid technique. It is beyond the scope of this text to make you a good piercer. That can only come with aptitude, practice, time, and patience.

The information herein is based upon the combined experience of nearly 20 piercers over a period spanning almost 20 years. And while these techniques are used daily in Gauntlet’s establishments, our piercers constantly seek ways to refine and improve them.

We all know there is a vast difference between just being able to do something and being able to do it professionally and well. Becoming a professional, “master” piercer—a title rapidly becoming meaningless because it is so abused these days—requires more than learning some basic information and techniques. A true “master” piercer always acts responsibly, i.e. safely, knowledgeably, and professionally. These are the traits and qualities you should cultivate and strive to assimilate. Unless and until they have all become an integral part of your being, you cannot consider yourself a professional, much less a “master,” piercer.

THE KNOWLEDGEABLE PIERCER

No matter what profession you pursue you will have to gain whatever knowledge is unique to it. Piercing is no different. Here are some of the things you will be required to know:

  • The names and locations of the various traditional piercings.
  • The best jewelry designs and materials for each.
  • How to prepare and mark them.
  • The appropriate piercing tools and techniques for each.
  • Their healing times and appropriate aftercare.
  • When a particular piercing isn’t a good choice for a particular individual.
  • Sterilization from A to Z.
  • How to deal with people, gain their trust, put them at ease.

THE SAFE PIERCER

Without question safety is the single most important requirement of any piercer. You simply must not put your clients or yourself at risk in any way.

  • Sterilization and hygiene must be strictly observed.
  • Never do a piercing that could endanger the piercee or install a piece of jewelry that is not appropriate even though the client might want it.
  • Never use an ear piercing gun to pierce anything. Period!
  • Absolutely never do piercing under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Likewise never pierce anyone who is intoxicated.

THE PROFESSIONAL PIERCER

With a solid knowledge of one’s craft and safe techniques and procedures, it is possible to be an acceptable piercer. To be a truly professional, “master” piercer requires the highest standards of character and conduct, qualities that go beyond the basics.

  • A professional piercer is ethical and honest. It is very important not to pretend to be something you’re not. Your clientele deserves the truth. They have a right to know the extent of your training and experience. Studying this manual does not entitle anyone to claim that they are “Gauntlet-trained.”
  • Arrogance and a know-it-all attitude are incompatible with professionalism.
  • The quality of a piercer’s work has a definite correlation to their motivation to pierce. Just as a physician who becomes a doctor for the prestige and money will make a poor caregiver, the piercer who is in it for a quick buck, or because it’s “cool” will probably not be very good at it.
  • Piercing requires patience and a willingness to listen to the fears of a client and respond to those fears in a way that will allow that person to relax and enjoy the experience. Although a good piercer will not always be able to connect with a client, they should make every effort to try and make the experience as positive as possible, or, if that isn’t possible, refer the client to another piercer. Whenever you are going to pierce someone, you should ask yourself, “Is this how I would want to be treated? Would I be comfortable in this situation”? Nothing will drive away business faster than a bad experience with you. And word of mouth can be your best or worst advertising.

These then are some of the most basic requirements of a responsible, professional piercer. Let’s now begin to look at these in greater detail.

Point 74: From the Editor – Jim Ward

1 Comment read Editorial, From the Editor, Issue 74, Technology
The Point - Issue 74

Jim Ward headshotJim Ward
Art Director

One of the joys of having been a part of this industry since its beginning has been seeing the technological advances that have brought it to such an astounding degree of professionalism.

Young piercers have no idea what things were like when Gauntlet was born in 1975. For starters, imagine a world without the cell phone, personal computer, and the internet. As the old cigarette commercial said, “You’ve come a long way, baby.”

When I first began my piercing business, I had to use a pressure cooker to sterilize instruments, later graduating to ever more sophisticated autoclaves. With the advent of the Statim, you are now blessed not only with more reliable sterilization, but are able to accomplish it within mere minutes.

The first piercing needles were veterinary hypodermics with the syringe couplings cut off. We sterilized and reused them over and over while they became duller with every use and often had to be used with a needle pusher. Nowadays, you have access to disposable needles that are so sharp they pierce the toughest of tissue like butter.

Even though I made every effort to provide the highest quality body jewelry, in those early days we had little understanding as to which materials were most suitable for the purpose of piercing. The industry is now blessed with an abundance of jewelry choices produced to the most stringent of manufacturing standards.

Many of you are familiar with Gauntlet’s publication Piercing Fans International Quarterly (PFIQ). Thanks to the personal computer and the marvel of desktop publishing, I’ve been able to say goodbye to the typewriter, the T­square, the drafting board, and all the art supplies that were used for years to produce the magazine. With a few mouse clicks, design and layout has become a breeze.

Technology is here to stay, and will continue to benefit our profession. I only hope that one day human kindness and compassion will catch up.

On another subject, for the last several issues of The Point I have participated as one of the Managing Editors. With this issue my title changes and I become the publication’s Art Director. I will still be an occasional Contributing Editor, and while I’m busy doing the layout and design, I get to edit the editors.

Over time I also hope to be able to bring some fresh design ideas to these pages. Enjoy!