Reading a thread by a tattoo artist on another forum and he had this to say in his OP:
"Every shop I’ve ever worked at has outright banned tattooing faces and fingers. You don’t need your face or fingers tattooed, and the people that we have to work with to do business (the city, for example) aren’t nice to us when they find out we’ve tattooing someone’s face.
Facial, hand, and neck tattoos are lovingly-referred to as “everlasting job-stoppers.” "
Haha, everlasting job-stoppers.
It looks like 18 is the minimum age in most places, but some states allow it for younger people if they have parental consent, and in Colorado there are no restrictiosn at all. The parlors can set whatever rules they want as long as they’re not breaking the law, but I can understand why they’d err on the side of caution. It’s not going to be good for their business if they have a constant stream of complaining parents.
You’re parsing words for the sake of argument. The vast majority of the tattoos I see are boilerplate doodles that on a good day looks like it was done by a Hanna Barbera sketch artist. The cutting edge aspect is the tattoo itself just as a piercing is. It’s a temporary fancy because nobody expects to wear the same shirt for the rest of their life.
It is in the context of living another 30 or 40 years. I can think of any number of projects I have spent months planning and executing, and which I was basically obsessed with at the time, in which I now have no interest. They aren’t in permanent ink on my face (or anywhere else) though.
Not really. Get a job where you wear a business suit to work and your problem is solved.
The salient point I’ve gathered from this thread is that DianaG thinks wearing sweatpants shows poor judgment.
snerk
Lets leave aside neck tattoos for a moment, as I’ve seen a few that were nice by people who were employed in jobs that might actually be considered desirable.
Have you ever seen a FACE tattoo that wasn’t an abomination? Seriously - what job, anywhere, is a dude with ‘skin’ tattooed in huge letters on his forehead going to get? Front man for a white supremest band? Secretary for the KKK? I don’t think even ultra liberal ad agencies or art shops or funky bars want obvious racists working there.
Or what about the guy with the full skull tattooed on his face? Perhaps it’s slightly less difficult to get work in a bar with that one, but anything with the public? I think no, unless he’s a tattoo artist himself. So - do I think these fellas are going to have a hard time finding work? Yes, pretty much.
It’s all a matter of degree. A flower on the back of the neck probably isn’t too offensive to any but the most staunchly anti-tattoo. A full face of racist profanity? Different, yah?
It’s like the hideous sweat-pant. If a multi-millionaire can’t make them look good, you’re deluding yourself if you think you can. And yes, this is gross, even for the grocery store.
Missed the edit: ETA, and I’m saying this as someone who just got this jacket with this this pant, in purple and then accidentally wore them to the mall. Degrees people. Degrees.
There’s no shortage of bad tattoos out there. We wouldn’t have this thread without them. 
There’s no question it’s permanent and not exactly the same as a piece of clothing. This “cutting edge” thing is projection. Some people probably still think tattoos are badass, but at this point perhaps people are getting them because they like them.
A lot of decisions are temporary if you use that time span. Some are major and some are minor.
Stay classy, Britney. (Why are her boobs down to her knees? Isn’t she like 25?)
Am I the only one who hates the word “pant”, instead of “pants”?
They look fine to me and I am guessing the vast majority of men. What exactly is so aberrant about her boobs?
They’re all long, flat, and saggy, like an old woman’s boobs (which is normal on an old woman). She obviously doesn’t mind going out in public without a bra and her boobs looking like that; I think she needs a proper support garment.
You’re confusing the issue. It’s not the decision that is temporary, it’s the fancy.
Any fancy that may well last for a shorter time than its effects I would be dubious about. Something where the effect might outlast the fancy by a factor of ten or twenty times appears to me to be one for which **Magiver’s **description - “a permanent reminder of a temporary fancy” - is notably apt.
Like herpes. Or marriage, for that matter.
Or kids. Often, yes. But fortunately for people who made those decisions, that falls under “protected classes” and the herpes thing isn’t likely to come up in a job interview.
See, I purposely left out kids because I was being all sensitive and shit. 
Sure. If you want a “famous person” example, I like the stars on Kat von D’s face. In real life, I’ve seen a number of well-done designs that worked into the eyebrows or jawline.
Ooh! Let’s see if I can play this game too!
OMG! JUDGING FROM THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE, THE ONLY POSSIBLE CONCLUSION I CAN DRAW IS THAT EVERYONE WHO WEARS MAKEUP IS A FREAK WITH DUBIOUS TASTE IN CARBONATED BEVERAGES!
…How was that?
Hey. I like Faygo. Their ginger ale is damned good.
:mad:
