Are noserings and tattoos unprofessional?

Great Debates
61

Again and again and again, I don’t dispute an individual’s right to bifurcate their tongue and tattoo Winston Churchill on their cheek if that’s how they choose to live their life. Accept, however, that nobody owes you a living and body modifications are not covered under any discrimination policies I know of.

I used to move and live in unusual circles where, like sghoul comments above, anything went but only one person (me) had a job that didn’t involve food. What most irritated me were the people who drew some parallel twixt unusual appearance and creatiivity/imagination. Ever seen photos of Stephen King, Kurt Vonnegut, Neil Gaiman, Dean Koontz, Mark Twain, Pablo Picasso, Jackson Pollock, Margaret Atwood, Ursula Le Guin, etc etc ad nauseum- people whose wild imaginations and bizarre creativities have been their livelihoods and made them world famous- ALL of them could walk completely unnoticed into the most conservative PGA affiliated club because they don’t feel the need to wear a costume to be creative individuals. I think to a large degree people who pierce everything that stands still and dress outlandishly do so for the same reason kids who don’t have his talent dress like Eminem.

But I could be wrong.

62

holmes I won. He didn’t have much of a case.

As often occurs in my area of practice, counsel on the other side often take these matters for reasons unclear to me, without really understanding the issues, or what it takes to win or lose at a particular level of review.

It was really wierd, tho, as that type of case involves a whole bunch of sort of jargon phrases, from 2-10 words long, describing the standard of review, the administrative process, etc. It was hard to just sit there and not offer to finish such phrases off for him, when he’d get hung up on one word or another, and I and the court KNEW what he was going to say - he was just having a real hard time getting it out. Probably the worst stutter I have ever personally encountered.

He was a real aggressive bastard in the way he presented his wrongheaded arguments too, which certainly suppressed any potential sympathy.

63

Sam, I’m arguing, I suppose, in the same vein as jsgoddess, yeah, it does matter, but it shouldn’t, although my arguement for diversity is meant to illustrate the fact that I believe expressions such as these deserve consideration as a part of our diverse culture, rather than being ‘alternative’. Regarding your example, I shuddered when you made dean koontz and Kurt Vonnegut equal examples, but for what that example is worth, this is a completely different time, and a completely different place in the universe. Twain didn’t look different? Pollock wasn’t a mess? You can bet these folks swam upstream in their youth as well, the mechanisms were quite different in past generations however. For the most part, those with excessive piercings and tattoos do see them as a grasp of youth (imo) as they give in to times ravages. The older folks have the money, the money equates to power, the power equates to the ability to dictate standards, and the ability to dictate standards never can be reconciled with the impetuousness and angst of youth. My only point in this diatribe is to say that while society doesn’t generally accept those who are ‘different’ by choice, perhaps one day society will be made to understand that in order to appeal to the rebellious spirit, one has to first recognize it, and then make standard, or at least acceptable, the less extreme parts of the rebellion, which will marginalize the effectiveness, generally, of the rebellion itself.

We have been made to realize that life is far too short to be wear the yolk of an ancient expectation of uniformity.

64

Why would you be considering doing business with “second rate educational facilities” in the first place? Or does looking like “circus clowns” make them “second rate”? Of course if these “circus clowns” are excellent teachers, you’re probably doing yourself a disservice.

Ummm…so? I don’t thnk anyone is actaully all that shocked at this.

No, they don’t. But I think employers only hurt themselves if they’re turning down qualified people based on appearance.

I think you are. Tattoos & piercings aren’t really all that “out there” any more. Some people just like to decorate their body.

65

You will find this to be true of (all) first rate educational facilities, too. Who will you ‘do business with’?

Ha - they are being ‘excepted’ [sic], in a sense!

Well, we are society and, as such, we collectively decide what is acceptable or not. MeanJoe said ‘It may be nice to live in a world where only our intellectual merits will be judged but that is never going to happen’ … and as long as people think that way, indeed it will not happen! Can we spell ‘self-fulfilling prophesy’?

However, the acceptable limits of ‘individuality’ are continually changing, and there seems to be a slow shift toward more tolerant attitudes (IMHO). This is something I am happy to see.

There are various sneering implications in this thread that wearing tattoos is a pathetic and misguided attempt to exert ‘individuality’. Well, as long as the conservative types feel this way, the tattoo-ee is indeed railing successfully against The Man - shall we look up ‘self-fulfilling prophesy’ again, and tattoo it on our collective forehead this time?

I look forward to the day when arbitrary codes of dress and ‘convention’ barely exist in society. When this happens, there will be no need to (e.g.) tattoo oneself as a statement ‘against’ anything. Instead, all personal choices of that type will be positive in nature, based on aesthetic appeal and genuine desire, rather than as a reactionary finger in the eye of conservatism.

But hopping back to the OP … is a tattoo-ee ‘unprofessional’? I’d say that within our current cultural bounds, there are a (small) number of professions where body modifications would impact on the person’s ability to do their job. In that sense, p’raps the body-mod’er is ‘unprofessional’, although this unprofessionalism is really a function of the biases of the idiot-masses in society. After all, a tattoo does not inherently affect the persons ability to do anything. (Well, almost anything. There are always exceptions).

As a final comment, as a UK-er currently in the USA, ISTM that the US is a great deal more hung up on issues of ‘decorum’ than the UK. One might expect the opposite, but - IME - it ain’t so! The majority of responses to this thread seem to fit this pattern.

66

You are presenting a false dichotomy here, I think. I will agree that there are some very talented people out there whose dress is very informal, even fringe, just as there are very formal groups that are terrible at what they do, but these are not your only options.
In my experience, clients will pay top dollar for a firm that can offer both talent and class.

If you are a successful client, you want to surround yourself with, and be represented by those who also radiate success. Tattoos and excessive piercings are not status symbols of the successful.

67

This might have been true in 1990; but in 2003 it is absurd. Tattoos at this point are an act of unthinking conformity, a part of counter-culture that has long, long since been co-opted by the mass market. I live in a conservative town (Orlando), and the downtown strip where all the frat boys go to drink Coronas on Friday night has the city’s largest piercing/tatoo places. You’ll pardon me if don’t envision their patrons as risk-taking, forward-thinking self-starters.

68

Why is it incumbent on the employer to make the accomodation, and not the employee?

69

Context and cultural norms are king in this debate. The fact of the matter is that while appearance may be valued more highly than is warranted by the situation, it does make a difference. It will always make a difference.

Whether a certain style of dress, jewelry, or hair-do is “professional” is entirely up to the person making the evaluation (i.e. the employer). If the position is one in which no direct contact with clients or customers occurs then the employer may have a relaxed version of what is acceptable in the workplace. Likewise, it may very well be that the employer feel’s that a “creative” work atmosphere is benefited by a loosened dress code. However, unless a potential employee has been alerted that the position entails relaxed workplace appearance standards, it isn’t sensible to simply assume that such things as nose rings, purple hair, or visible tattoos are a non issue.

An interviewee typically has a very limited amount of time to make a good impression on an employer. Presentation during this time is critical. If a person wishes to attend the interview with what may be considered an inappropriate appearance they run the risk of being “dinged” on the basis of appearance. Unless cultural norms regarding proper workplace attire change, or an applicant specifically seeks out jobs which are known to have relaxed appearance standards, I think it is safe to say that the net effect of a nose ring or visible tattoos during interviews will be negative.

I would guess that people who continue to present themselves in such a fashion are aware of the trade off (i.e. overall net negative effect during interviews while at the same time maintaining an appearance they find desirable) and accept that the good (for them) outweighs the bad. That being said, it’s foolish to whine about interviewers being “judgemental” regarding someone’s appearance when it’s clearly the interviewee who is aware of, and accepting, the risk of a negative reaction based on their non-standard appearance.

Grim

70

Would you have turned down the same person if they had a football sized goiter on the side of their neck. How about if they had just had a lot of plastic surgery due to a fire that severely scarred their face but looked ok now but with a lot of noticeable burn scars still? How about if the person was from that Pacific Island (is it Polynesia and well within the equal protection clauses of the law) where the males are ritually filled tattooed as an initiation into adulthood over their entire body who just happened to have everything else that you are looking for?

I think you should base hiring off of the abilities of the person. Not everyone came from identical backgrounds. Also, if your employee handbook doesn’t include rules hiding tattoos and piercings for the employees you are basing your opinion on what professional dress is off of something that should be a non-issue.

I had teachers in upscale high schools who had visible tattoos and varying hairstyles. Though the teachers always conformed to the dress code.

71

I saw a cartoon once in an attorneys office of a man in a clown suit behind a desk saying to another man: “Think of it this way. If I wasn’t a very, very good lawyer, could I practice law in a clown suit?” Funny, but it makes a point.

There’s a lawyer famous for having a look that would ordinarily be considered somewhat unprofessional. He has long white hair. He doesn’t wear a suit and tie. He wears a Stetson cowboy hat, buckskin jacket, cowboy boots, and a big silver belt buckle. When I say buckskin jacket, I mean the full-on fringed Davy Crockett job. This is his courtroom attire. His name is Gerry Spence.

Gerry Spence is also one of the most famous and accomplished trial lawyers in the country. He’s never lost a criminal trial. He hasn’t lost a civil trial since 1969. He successfully defended Randy Weaver in the Ruby Ridge trial and Imelda Marcos in her federal trial, and won the Karen Silkwood case. He’s won more multi-million dollar lawsuits than any lawyer in America. If you refused to do business with Spence because of his unconventional appearance, you’d be out of your mind. Appearance is important, but between appearance and the guy who’s going to win the case for me, give me the guy who’s going to win every time.

72

I’m guilty of judging people who go to a ‘professional’ place wearing nose rings and having tattoos showing on arms and such, but I really try not to. It’s kind of automatic!! I have to shut my brain up and get to know the person.

Then if you hire someone who thinks a nose ring is ok for an interview…who knows what they will show up at work with…again another instant though I try to quell!! Of course, if there is a dress code then they should have the brains to follow it.

Thing is that co-workers and cutomers do need to mesh, and some customers are very close-minded (then why would I want them as customers?-Need their money…ack!!) and you have to keep your ‘audience’ in mind.

Now if she going to be a mechanic, that’s one thing, but someone like a receptionist will have to comply to the image of the company while she is working. If she’s working as a receptionist at a tatto place…well then a nose ring would probably be more than fine.

It depends on the job, it really does.
If you think a nose ring is fine to apply as a professional in a very conservative place, you have to know that 'take me or leave me as I am" will result in ‘leave you’.

Some co-workers of mine (senior) hired this girl who wore jeans to the interview as an administrative applicant. When she got to work she wore these extremely tight '80’s pants and '80’s hairdo, and she smelled. She also had this one hair growing out of a mole on her face that I couldn’t believe she didn’t notice or left there!! She had chef-boy-r-dee for lunch every day, and I was pg and got nautious every time!! She took lots of smoke breaks and talked like red neck with spittle flying everywhere quite often.

This was a very professional place, but she was one of only two applicants, and the other applicant was young and pretty, and the old ladies doing the hiring hate young and pretty. So we got stuck with this wierdo who didn’t fit in at all. She also got overwhelmed easily and fell behind in the work and got fired. I think the younger woman would have had much more energy!! They both were coming out of college with the same credentials.

So this wierd discrimation of a girl who was bright eyed and bushy tailed ended up in us getting someone I would have never hired because I would have been offended by her attire right off the bat and that facial hair! Not to mention the bad breath and horrific odour of old stale cig smoke smell on her clothes!

Sigh, you can’t win for losing sometimes!! So yes, you will be judged, and quite often for looking good too!!

So just being yourself within reason for the job applying for, and you still will never know why you get turned down for sure!!

dumb old jealous ladies!!

73

**Originally posted by Ethilrist
On the other hand, if you were interviewing for your basic low-energy personality-free office drone, she might not have been such a good fit. **

The hell? The people I currently work with include a former Israeli paratrooper who later worked in a circus as a contortionist, several former Peace Corps volunteers, a Wiccan priestess, and a guy who plays in a heavy metal band on weekends. All of them wear proper business attire. My own past includes everything from prize winning bunjee jumps to membership in a family of Mormon polygamists. Thanks be to all the gods at once that I’m not so insecure that I feel the need to wear “groovy duds like you meddlin’ kids today” to feel interesting.

po·seur ( P ) Pronunciation Key (p-zr, pzr)
n.
One who affects a particular attribute, attitude, or identity to impress or influence others.

[French, from poser, to pose, from Old French. See pose1.]

74

Not sure if your comments were directed at me dorkus but I’m happy to respond.

If I was the employer it wouldn’t make a bit of difference to me if the person in question had scars due to an injury or were deformed in some way provided it didn’t interfere with their ability to do the work. Obviously physical deformities would probably preclude working as a model and it may be a liability in professions where appearance is especially critical. For other types of work (read: the majority of professions out there) I wouldn’t consider it a strike against them since the traits you describe (goiter, burn scars) aren’t easily changeable and are likely to have been due to misfortune, rather than a conscious choice on their part. In the case of the tattooed islander (an extreme example IMHO) it would be important to know how else they appeared. Were all of their tattoos covered by the appropriate clothing during the interview? If so, non issue, as the interviewer would never be aware of thier presence. If they weren’t covered could they have been covered without difficulty? (i.e. tattoos on arms, legs, back are easy. Face, hands, neck much more difficult). What is the nature of the job and it’s requirements (note that I mentioned this in my earlier post)? Regardless of what I think it is incumbent on the interviewee to minimize aspects of their appearance which may not be in line with cultural norms in general and the position in particular.

If I was giving interviews and the company had not specified a policy regarding tattoos and piercings then I wouldn’t count it against potential applicants. However, unless it has been communicated to applicants beforehand, it’s unlikely that they would know this and it is a risk for them to assume that tattoos and unusual piercings are acceptable for an interview. As I said earlier, unless cultural norms change, the applicant knows before hand that standards are relaxed for this specific opening, or this type of work generally has relaxed standards across the industry unusual piercings and visible tattoos are likely to be a net negative.

Bottom line: Scars and such aren’t easily correctible. Choice in this matter for the applicant is limited. Visible tattoos and piercings are very much a matter of choice and it would be unwise for the applicant to assume that they will make no impact during an interview where leaving a good impression is vital. Thus, it would behoove them to choose to minimize any characteristic which might count against them.

75

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by dorkusmalorkusmafia *
**Would you have turned down the same person if they had a football sized goiter on the side of their neck. How about if they had just had a lot of plastic surgery due to a fire that severely scarred their face but looked ok now but with a lot of noticeable burn scars still? **

Of course not; I know relatively few people who have goiters or scars as a conscious choice and I honestly don’t see noserings as being in the same category.

**How about if the person was from that Pacific Island (is it Polynesia and well within the equal protection clauses of the law) where the males are ritually filled tattooed as an initiation into adulthood over their entire body who just happened to have everything else that you are looking for? **

No, but that’s only because Polynesians tattooed as tribal initiation rituals are already too prevalent in my profession.
Let me return the question: would you hire an Arabic woman who was perfectly qualified who remained veiled beneath a black wool headdress, had body odor (as part of her religion she does not use cosmetics), and bowed in prayer three times each day during business hours? There are a lot more of those than there are Polynesians.

An Indian woman in full sari and nose ring I’d hire in a heart beat- not only is it a part of their culture, but even the ones who are old and fat are somehow gorgeous. (If I were any more enamored of Indian women I’d be straight.)

**Not everyone came from identical backgrounds. **

Really? Never thought of that.

Generally speaking, when you move into an area you are expected to adjust to THEIR norms, not the other way around. In this area, noserings and visible tattoos are not norms. Yes, I know, at one point pantsuits for women and earrings for men were also not norms, but gradually they became so and nobody gives them a second notice, myself included; perhaps in 20 years I’ll look back on this candidate and feel as foolish as people who thought the Beatles were once long-haired weirdos, but currently it’s three days rather than 20 years.

We do have a dress code and it’s in fact draconian, but it’s not enforced. It calls for skirts for women, short hair for men, etc., but as I said nobody follows it. Noserings weren’t an issue when they were published so they’re not spoken to.

76

Actually, I think circumcision is a mutilation, too. Unless it’s necessary for some specific medical reason (which I’m led to believe it rarely is) I’d not subject a son of mine to it. But that’s a whole other debate.

77

quote:

Originally posted by jsgoddess
Someone in this thread said they’d be repulsed if a server in a restaurant had piercings. But what if the server had a scar? Or a large strawberry mark on his or her face? Acne? Psoriasis? A harelip? Cross-eyed?

All of the things mentioned are difficult or impossible to do anything about, and none are self-inflicted. Well, maybe the scar. And no, I would have no problem.

78

The interviewing group at my company has a running joke that the better dressed an applicant is, the less qualified they turn out to be. If If I ever see a programmer wear a tie to an interview (and it doesn’t happen often), I write him off immediately.

79

I’d bet dollars to donuts Gerry Spence didn’t do the Davy Crockett thing when he first started out. Sure, after you’re won a zillion cases and have been interviewed on TV countless times, the buckskin thing is charming and eccentric. If you’re just some poor shlub with a law degree, the buckskin thing makes you look like Cletus the Slack-Jawed Yokel. You can get away with a lot more after you’ve made a name for yourself.

Or, as Crash Davis put it in Bull Durham:

80

The whole focus on appearances is, to me, one of the sadder aspects of human society. Some posters here seem to feel that wearing suits and making others do so if they want to be employed is something worthy, others justify it as soemthing that must be accepted as part of society.

Well, yes it is part of society, but it is a GOOD part? To me, it’s a failing, like being unable to do anythign to prevent crime so we put criminals in cages for years after the fact. It’s a solution, but hardly one I’d go around bragging about. Or the way in which wealth is distributed so that some are billioaires while millions can’t get enough to it.

Oh, we got a LONG way to go as a species, and to me the focus on superficial appearances is just another proof of it. I wouldn’t be real PROUD of it.