Free Hand and Minimalistic Piercing Methods

This might be a bit more technical than some of my other piercing blogs. Still, occasionally, I do get clients asking how I perform a specific type of piercing or inquiring about my reasoning behind recommending it. I decided after a couple of recent conversations about Free Hand and Minimalistic Piercing Methods that I should write something on the subject. My goal is not only to express my opinions on the subject but also to help educate those considering getting a piercing about some of the risks and advantages involved.

If you look at the history of Body Piercing as an industry, it all started with Jim Ward's Gauntlet way back in 1975. Employees and associates, such as Elayne Angel, Fakir Musafar, Mr. Sabatian, and Doug Mallory, helped not only to perfect most of the methods, including piercing placement and jewelry, but also to educate the industry that experienced an explosion in the 1990s. They, through trial and error, developed the basic methods of piercing and the equipment used to perform them. Many of the first professional piercers either were trained by Gauntlet or were semi-self-taught through the how-to articles in Jim Ward and Gauntlet's Piercing Fans International Quarterly. 

When I began piercing professionally in 1994, there was already a standard method and a set list of equipment used for the various piercings that I was trained to perform. At that point, it was the Pennington Forceps, Foster Forceps, Needle Receiving Tube, Hemostats, Taper Pins, Ring Opening Pliers, Ring Closing Pliers, Calipers, Cork, and of course, piercing needles. In addition, the uses of surgical scrubs include Betadine, sterile gauze, and cotton-tip applicators. For the most part, in the years that have followed, not much has changed in my list of tools or the basic procedure in which I perform a piercing. The well-thought-out methods and techniques were designed to increase the success of the piercing and reduce the risks to the health of the piercer and the piercee. 

Now I don't do everything exactly as I was trained to do it. Over the years, I have refined my methods, not only to enhance the effectiveness of my piercings but also to accommodate the ever-changing shapes and sizes of the human body. The reality is that often the most tried and true method of piercing a part of the body isn't the best choice when nature throws you a curveball when it comes to the anatomy you are presented with. Some placements wouldn't work or would be significantly altered with the use of forceps.

Free-hand piercings and minimal piercings are not a new idea or a cutting-edge concept. They have both been around in some form since the first time someone slipped on a pair of gloves, punctured a part of the human body, and slid a piece of jewelry. If you want to dig back into the history of modern piercing, you might want to dig out some of the old PFIQ how-to articles and some of the early Gauntlet how-to videos. I have to admit wincing while watching a Prince Albert piercing done extremely slowly, without a needle receiving tube, in one of those early videos.

The fact is that tools and their uses were added to piercing procedures not only to make piercing easier but also to increase safety and improve the outcome of the piercings. I understand the concepts behind freehand piercings and minimizing the number of items used during the piercing process. The idea being that with fewer items involved, there is a reduced chance of cross-contamination. My biggest question to this is, don't you have a sterilizer? I mean, if you are taking the correct steps to sterilize your equipment before using it, what is the issue?

Another point that is brought up is that altering the shape of the piercing can affect its placement or cause damage to the tissue. To this, I have to say that marking the placement correctly in the first place will allow you to clamp the piercing area correctly to ensure that the placement is correct. What's that you don't mark the piercing? What? Are you aware that the simple act of reclining or sitting up can significantly impact how the body sits, and the piercing area can undergo a complete transformation? It is why we mark piercings that are affected by the stance of the piercee, like Nipples and Navel, with the piercee standing. The reason is simple: those parts of the body rest completely differently when the person is sitting or lying down. 

Don't get me wrong, I think there is a lot of thought that has gone into their methods. Still, I've also noticed when encountering a number of those piercings without marking and tools, there is an attitude that somehow the use of tools or the vital step of marking the correct location of the piercing is less skilled or beneath their greatness.  The word cocky comes to mind and I'm sorry to rain on the parade but that is dangerous and a bit unethical when you are taking another person's health and safety in your hands. It's like this: I can drive a car without a seatbelt just fine, but regardless of how skilled I am as a driver, there are events outside of my control that could cause an accident, and it's in my best interest to wear a seatbelt. Also, I could drive with my knees or with my eyes shut, but it wouldn't be safe.

With that in mind, I thought it might be a good idea to list some of the tools, items, and their methods as a reminder of why they were used in the first place. 

• Surgical Scrub - Applying it to the surface of the area that is about to be punctured to decrease the chances of foreign pathogens that the piercer has encountered being introduced into the piercer's body and causing an infection.
• Marking - Making a mark that will not change regardless of the client's stance, to ensure that the placement is straight and correct. Also, to show the client to make sure not only that it is the correct piercing, but that the placement is what they desire.
• Forceps​ - Though not useful in areas of the body that it will affect the shape of the piercing area. Where they are helpful, they flatten the tissue, producing a faster and less painful piercing, line up the piercing markings to ensure correct placement, support the tissue, and allow the piercer to move and adjust the tissue to ensure the placement is accurate. The other thing that must be considered is the fact that it does reduce the likelihood of a needle stick by allowing the piercing to move and adjust the piercing area with no direct contact or fingers in the way of the piercing. Not using forceps can also slow down the speed of the piercing and require the piercer to pierce at a much slower rate.
• Needle Receiving Tube - Adds support to the exit point of the piercing in areas where a cork can not be used, but doesn't slow down or impede the piercing. Also allows the needle to travel through tight areas of the body without causing damage to the skin surrounding the piercing area, for example, some ear piercings and genital piercings. Not using an NTR can also slow down the speed of the piercing and require the piercer to pierce at a much slower rate.
• Cork - Supports the exit area of the piercing so that the needle can cut through the tissue instead of tearing the tissue. Protects the piercer against needle strikes. Not using a cork can also slow down the speed of the piercing and require the piercer to pierce at a much slower rate.
• Hemostats - Allows the piercer to grip jewelry in tight areas of the body and move or close jewelry more quickly than they could by hand.
• Ring Closing and Opening pliers - Allows the piercer to open and close larger gauge jewelry without causing additional stress to the piercing or increased pain to the piercee.
• Taper Pins - Has a great deal of uses beyond its design as an aid for stretching piercings and inserting jewelry of a larger gauge. Including a tool for inserting internal labret studs in part of the body where the piercing needs to be done in the opposite direction by pushing the needle out with a taper pin and then inserting the thin end inside the Labret and inserting the jewelry in the opposite direction of the piercing.  Also used in rare cases where the jewelry and needle separate during jewelry insertion.

I want to emphasize something that concerns me the most, and that is the risk of a needle stick. This is an extreme risk to not only the health of the piercer but also to that of the piercee. One needs to know that a piercing needle is a hypodermic needle that is designed to inject fluids into the body and extract them. So when a piercing needle goes through the body of the client and then punctures the piercer's finger or hand, a couple of things happen. The first is that the needle that the piercer has contaminated is directly injected into the piercer's bloodstream. Thus introducing foreign pathogens to the pierer. At the same time, the needle will draw blood from the piercer and contaminate the needle. So a needle stick puts both at risk.

Call me a zealot, but any precaution that will reduce the likelihood of a needle stick should be taken without question. The small probability of a client being contaminated by a pre-sterilized item and the risk of a needle stick caused by increasing the likelihood of putting fingers in harm's way should be considered. Additionally, I should note that in nearly 19 years of piercing using corks, forceps, etc. I have had four needle strikes. That is one every 4.75 years, and in every case, the cause was something that I didn't predict would happen.  In almost every case, the client's reaction to the piercing was not what I had foreseen. I attribute my track record to not only my skill but to the methods developed by those who came before me. 

So what does all this mean as a piercee or client? Well, ask your pierce about their methods and what precautions they have taken to ensure your safety and their own. An ethical piercer will not only take the time to explain their methods but should have a well-thought-out reason behind this. I like to walk my clients through the procedure, explaining what I'm doing and the reasons behind each action.

I want to point out one last thing, and I understand that I don't always feel this is the case, but it should be considered. Removing tools and items from the piercing procedure reduces the cost of the piercing and the amount of work required to disinfect and sterilize these items and tools. Body Piercing is a business, and one of the things that life has taught me about businesses is that they often cut overhead and then come up with some justification for the reduction of overhead. Maintaining tools and stocking items cost money. Sterilization of tools and items costs money in the form of disinfectants, maintaining and testing a sterilizer, and the sterilization pouches. 

In conclusion, when considering whether to get a new piercing or perform one, consider the risks involved and the importance of limiting the use of tools and other items that can make the piercing not only better placed and less painful but also significantly reduce the risks to the health of both the individual and the piercer. A piercing can be a life-changing experience, but it shouldn't be a life-threatening experience.