# Anti-tattoo discrimination; should this be a thing? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [August 18, 2014, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821 "2014-08-18T12:56:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2014, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/61 "2014-08-20T23:43:43Z")
When she says put a “plaster” over it, I think that’s the UK equivalent of saying put a “[Band-Aid](http://www.band-aid.com/)” over it. UKers confirm? ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2014, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/62 "2014-08-20T23:46:09Z")
> [@Yllaria](#): > > I was going to say she could put a bandaid over it (as is done in some fast food places), but that was going by her description. That’s too big a tat for even the biggest bandaid. Or theater makeup. That’s what one of my former co-workers did, 15+ years ago when visible tattoos in a professional workplace were much rarer than they are now. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2014, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/63 "2014-08-20T23:50:36Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > Let’s think about that one for a second. I’m going to presume that older people have had more time to add tats to themselves, while the younger folk have maybe just gotten their first art done. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/64 "2014-08-21T01:27:18Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > Yes, one possible interpretation is the previous generation 18-25 group got most of the tattoos among adults in the US and is now in the older group, and the younger group while still heavily tattooed compared to several generations ago is not getting them as much as the immediately preceding generation, which jives with my own personal observation about the fewer visible tattoos exhibited by a current large cohort–the undergraduate population of a large state university. > > ETA: but this digressions is not germane to the OP; probably best to drop it. No, the fact you stated was misleading and ought to be called out for what it is. Older people tend to have more of _everything_ than younger people, for no other reason than they have had more time to accumulate said things. Older people have more sex partners than younger people, but that doesn’t mean sex is out of style. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/65 "2014-08-21T01:32:24Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > Now, I realize that most people don’t have that tattoo, but because some people do, trying to write legislation that says twee little insects, or your soulmate’s initials are OK, but profanity and images of death are not starts to get tricky. Maybe puppies vs. zombies is easy, but what about a picture of your dead BFF, with RIP under it, or religious imagery, like bleeding Jesus? (My Jewish kid, who isn’t familiar with Christian symbolism, saw a guy’s huge back tattoo of a crucified Jesus, dripping blood, when the kid was about 4, and he got really scared). It isn’t that hard. I can wear dress pants to work, I cannot wear hot pants. I can dye my hair copper red, I cannot dye my hair neon green. These judgement calls happen every single day. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/66 "2014-08-21T01:32:30Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > When she says put a “plaster” over it, I think that’s the UK equivalent of saying put a “[Band-Aid](http://www.band-aid.com/)” over it. UKers confirm? You’d be right - But please do note, it’s never right to go to a professional office “plastered” - ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/67 "2014-08-21T01:36:44Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > No, the fact you stated was misleading and ought to be called out for what it is. > > Older people tend to have more of _everything_ than younger people, for no other reason than they have had more time to accumulate said things. Older people have more sex partners than younger people, but that doesn’t mean sex is out of style. Yep. I had 300% more ink when I was 30 than when I was 20. More time for accumulation. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/68 "2014-08-21T01:44:59Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > I think it looks like a tramp stamp in the wrong place, but I’m no expert. > > I agree. I read a complaint by a guy who couldn’t get a job because of his tattoo, and whined on for several paragraphs about how “Tattoo was the new Black,” or something like that. It turned out that he had a skull tattoo over half his face. He looked like an extra in a zombie movie. > > How’d you like to be in a car accident, and the EMT who comes over to start your IV has that tattoo? Or even the guy selling you a new car? > > Now, I realize that most people don’t have that tattoo, but because some people do, trying to write legislation that says twee little insects, or your soulmate’s initials are OK, but profanity and images of death are not starts to get tricky. Maybe puppies vs. zombies is easy, but what about a picture of your dead BFF, with RIP under it, or religious imagery, like bleeding Jesus? (My Jewish kid, who isn’t familiar with Christian symbolism, saw a guy’s huge back tattoo of a crucified Jesus, dripping blood, when the kid was about 4, and he got really scared.) > > **It’s better to allow employers to ban tattoos if they wish. As for ones that are never visible, well, don’t ask, don’t tell. They can’t exactly strip-search you**. Sharing some different views… In Singapore, the law is pretty similar to the “at will” status of the US, you don’t have to give a reason for firing, and having a visible tattoo, in most instances, is going to be frowned upon (not least of which for still prevalent attitudes about triads) In New Zealand, where the law is a bit different, you have to have a “good reason” to dismiss people (and also to not hire them in the first place). You _could_ fire someone for visible tattoos - but you would also need to be able to defend your decision rationally, and with logic in a “reasonable man” test. Would firing a non-public staff for a small, inoffensive tattoo on the ankle pass the test? Probably not (regardless of what the staff handbook said). On the other hand, would a skull over half the face for a car salesman pass the test? Most likely (IMHO). ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/69 "2014-08-21T10:48:27Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > It isn’t that hard. I can wear dress pants to work, I cannot wear hot pants. I can dye my hair copper red, I cannot dye my hair neon green. These judgement calls happen every single day. Yes, but if your employer doesnt like your hot pants, you can change them. No judgement needed–just follow instructions. If you can’t follow the instructions, then you have to live with the consequences of your choice to get a tattoo. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/70 "2014-08-21T13:41:56Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > In New Zealand, where the law is a bit different, you have to have a “good reason” to dismiss people (and also to not hire them in the first place). You _could_ fire someone for visible tattoos - but you would also need to be able to defend your decision rationally, and with logic in a “reasonable man” test. > > Would firing a non-public staff for a small, inoffensive tattoo on the ankle pass the test? Probably not (regardless of what the staff handbook said). On the other hand, would a skull over half the face for a car salesman pass the test? Most likely (IMHO). Upholding a blanket policy against visible tattoos so you don’t have to argue over whether any given tattoo is “inoffensive” would likely pass the test. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/71 "2014-08-21T14:28:31Z")
I hope other employers are stupid enough to fire good people for reasons like this. More talent for me. ---
**Author:** ![bucketybuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@bucketybuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bucketybuck)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/72 "2014-08-21T15:05:12Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > And an older character (not Walter “Grampa” Brennan, though, IIRC) felt the need to pipe up with: “That’s on forever now; hope ya like it.” Or words to that effect. Dunno, seem like pertinent words to me. ---
**Author:** ![Pabitel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbce88/32.png) [@Pabitel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pabitel)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/73 "2014-08-21T15:16:05Z")
tattooed professional? Isn’t that an oxymoron, like military intelligence? What could be more unprofessional than a visible tattoo? How about mohawked professional, or mulleted professional do those sound reasonable? If you want to be taken seriously (and be employed) in any profession you have to make personal grooming choices that are conservative. If it is so important to you personally to look like a sideshow freak choose a career other than the law, business management or investment banking. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/74 "2014-08-21T15:28:09Z")
> [@Pabitel](#): > > tattooed professional? > > Isn’t that an oxymoron, like military intelligence? Or “well-informed internet commenter who turns up on page 2?” > [@](#): > > If you want to be taken seriously (and be employed) in any profession you have to make personal grooming choices that are conservative. If it is so important to you personally to look like a sideshow freak choose a career other than the law, business management or investment banking. Not a word of that is true. As noted, about 20% of U.S. adults have tattoos, and I don’t think any of them need your wrongheaded advice. ---
**Author:** ![Pabitel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbce88/32.png) [@Pabitel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pabitel)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/75 "2014-08-21T16:33:36Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Not a word of that is true. As noted, about 20% of U.S. adults have tattoos. But what percentage of those with MBAs, law degrees or banking jobs have them? ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/76 "2014-08-21T16:40:39Z")
> [@Pabitel](#): > > But what percentage of those with MBAs, law degrees or banking jobs have them? The law firm where I work just hired an attorney who has large tattoos up and down both arms and legs. When she sees clients, she wears long pants and long-sleeved blouses (or a cardigan or jacket). But she was understandably a tad nervous about showing her extensive ink in the office when she first started. I was doing some IT training for her during her first week, and it was hot in her office, so she fessed up to me - luckily for her, i assured her, this is a more open-minded law firm than the vast majority, and nobody would care (at least nobody who mattered for her purposes) as long as she covered up when appearing in court, before government agencies, or with clients. She knows this firm is the exception, though. And we do immigration law, not real estate or M&A or something with a more conservative clientele. ---
**Author:** ![PorchePine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@PorchePine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PorchePine)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/77 "2014-08-21T16:41:22Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Not a word of that is true. As noted, about 20% of U.S. adults have tattoos, and I don’t think any of them need your wrongheaded advice. Almost 9% of US adults have a criminal conviction. So that must be a pretty professional thing to have as well. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/78 "2014-08-21T16:45:08Z")
> [@Pabitel](#): > > But what percentage of those with MBAs, law degrees or banking jobs have them? The most senior partner at my firm has two, that I know of. They are not visible when he’s dressed for court. Almost all of our paralegals have tattoos. Some more obvious than others. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/79 "2014-08-21T16:49:32Z")
> [@Pabitel](#): > > But what percentage of those with MBAs, law degrees or banking jobs have them? So far I haven’t found any statistics. Based on your stereotyping I’ll say it’s obviously more than you think; look at how many people over 30 and over 40 have tattoos. ---
**Author:** ![Amberlei](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e56c9b/32.png) [@Amberlei](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amberlei)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821/80 "2014-08-21T16:54:20Z")
As others have mentioned, that is most definitely not a 4cm tattoo. Even so, she could have easily covered it by wearing opaque stockings or boots, allowing her to continue wearing her “smart dresses” while avoiding looking stupid. According to the article, she knew for several weeks that her tattoo was an issue but made no effort to comply with company policy, stating that wearing socks or a plaster would look stupid. There was no mention made of wearing boots, tights, or dress pants, all of which would have covered her tattoo and complied with the company policy. IMO flouting the company policy for fear of looking stupid actually requires a great deal of stupidity. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-tattoo-discrimination-should-this-be-a-thing/695821.md?page=5)