Judging people with unfortunate tattoo choices?

Great Debates
61

I am always confused and irritated at the idea that, because I am a self-identified liberal, it means I am not allowed to negatively critique anything. Apparently, only conservatives can make judgments, have a moral sense, etc. etc. That somehow because I am generally tolerant, it naturally follows that I must needs be tolerant of attitudes and behaviors that actively harm me.
Look, a tattoo is a personal statement. I say that as the owner of several- they each commemorate some part of my identity. I’ve chosen to put them on myself, and also chosen to place them where, since I aspire to a conventional career, I can cover them up at need. After my work product and reputation has spoken for itself, I can then allow my non-standard self to show through.
Here’s the thing- both the suit and tie, clean cut attorney and the inked D&D geek are authentically me.

This person chose to get a tattoo that by all norms is out of the ordinary, and ether offensive or threatening. As a potential employer, I am in one of four spots.

  1. the business IS me, and so everyone that I employ must adhere to my general sense of taste and values in order to reduce discord in the work space.
  2. I have a target market that has a stated preference as to the look they expect from those that provide services on my behalf, and I enforce a dress code that meets that expectation.
  3. In either of these cases, I don’t have to worry about visual representation of me, my product, or my employees, but I do have a stack of apps to go through for each position, and all things being equal, I can find a candidate without this social baggage. So why would I?
  4. I am looking to do a good deed, and this seems like a person who made bad choices and wants to clean up his act. I might do it, and understand I am taking a risk by doing so. I should be lauded for it, but a failure to provide charity isn’t really something we condemn.

And before someone jumps in with ‘ah, but what if your customers want to be served by white people only’ let’s recall I said a tattoo is a choice. Both in getting it and continuing to keep it. So let’s not muddy that waters with protected class discrimination- not everything is protected, nor should it be. Personal choices have consequences, and that’s appropriate.

62

How many rounds do you think that magazine holds? :confused:

63

Three, unless the other side of the gun is tatted on the back of his head.

64

While not a universal statement, I find that people who are intolerant of tattoos to be poor co-workers and employers in general. As they tend to be focused on external trivialities and care more about pleasing others than meeting business and project goals.

Sure we all fall for in-group/out-group failings where we we assign moral failings to differences that we don’t identify with while excusing truly negative traits of those we do identify with but unless this is related to a service job who cares.
I know that society isn’t going to change, but I consider it a cognitive error like Parkinson’s law of triviality where if tattoos are a hard no on employment etc… it seems to me that a person is focusing on minor but easy-to-grasp issues because they can’t contemplate what is important to the companies goals or the teams needs.

While not extending to silly standards like women not being rejected because they chose to wear pants, why is it any more valid?

Someone could be impeccably dressed, with manicured nails and perfect skin yet be a horrid alcoholic, unqualified or abusive to coworkers. And after spending most of the 90’s fixing peoples computers at home I know that most people make lots of poor choices in life. What is so special about an artistic choice on adornment? People have been getting tattoos for over 5000 years so it isn’t like it is new. Should we also filter out people for owning Kate Spade bags or Men’s Prada shoes? Those items show a current state of bad judgement if you are trying to run a business.

How about focusing on the business goals and needs and not focusing on fashion?

65

Have you* read* this thread? No one is ranting about him having a tattoo in general, it’s about his poor choice of having a gun tattooed in the middle of his forehead. Like if he had a swastika there.

66

Yep

And I also noticed the two pages of false dichotomy.

But how about providing an argument that a gun tattoo is equivalent to a swastika? Does a Yosemite Sam or Cult 45 fan’s tattoo also automatically make them an unemployable “degent”?

67

That is a gang thug tat. And yes, it’s about the same as a swastika.

68

Equivalent? If you are aware of the general type of folks that make the choice to express themselves through this type of art, yes. But even if you divorce it from any other context, please consider that most people are not comfortable with casual expressions of violence. I read it as a warning, advising me to stay back. And so I will. Regardless of how one feels about tattoos generally, that’s not an unreasonable reaction, and the folks painting it as such are reaching a bit, I think.

69

Yosemite Sam is a gang thug tat??

70

Location, location, location.

71

No, the one in the Op. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

72

You guys got us. We all hate all tattoos, and wouldn’t piss on a person with a tattoo if they were on fire. We tried to hide it, but you were too smart for us.

Or…can we stop attacking the strawman of “you guys hate all tattoos!”?

Because I’m perfectly fine with tattoos.

It’s the choice of getting a gun tattooed on your face that I’m not fine with.

And yeah, maybe he got this face tattoo 15 years ago, and now he’s found Jesus or whatever. Fine with me. Maybe he’s turned his life around, it happens. And if you read back, if I were a hiring manager and he showed up, I’d consider him. But since he was enough of an idiot 15 years ago to get a gun tattooed on his face, he’d have to actually convince me that he really has changed. Not just “Hey, maybe I’ve changed, you don’t know.” Like, actually convince me.

There are a couple levels. One would a swastika on the face. The gun on the face is lower than that. And Spongebob on the face is lower than that.

But even Spongebob reveals some poor impulse control, right? Why did he get Spongebob on his face, exactly? It’s because he doesn’t give a damn what the pencil-pushers back at headquarters think, right? Hey, if a bunch of squares think his face tattoo is a problem, it’s a problem, but it’s their problem?

Except I’ve got to work with this guy. And a guy who doesn’t care what anybody else thinks is not a guy who I want to work with. Yes, on “House”, Hugh Laurie doesn’t give a damn what anyone else thinks, and he’s always right. Except that’s fiction. In real life the guy who doesn’t give a damn what anyone else thinks is frequently not right. And then what?

73

Everyone gets misdiagnosed with Lupus?

ETA: your post was spot on, by the way.

74

And in the intervening 15 years, hasn’t grown up enough to have it removed so that their employment chances would increase.

That isn’t someone I want to be paying to do many jobs - a bike shop, a tattoo parlour…yeah, ok. Most other jobs, it would be a sign of immaturity - and most other jobs want grown ups as employees.

75

I think he’s more likely to get a job as a bank teller than in a tattoo parlor. If you walked into a tattoo parlor and saw that, you’d turn around and walk right back out.

76

And while its far from universal, I’ve discovered that team members who refuse to adhere to the simple social norms and conventions of a workplace - such as no face tattoos, wearing t-shirts with inappropriate slogans on them, bathing irregularly, using language more appropriate for longshoremen than an office environment, showing up to work in pajama pants - often become a liability when they don’t adhere to social conventions regarding appropriate workplace humor, how to treat their coworkers, or use of the corporate assets. Most of the team members I’ve worked with who have had appropriate tats for the workplace (glimpses of them don’t cause any women or minorities to complain, anything that tends to be visible while in office attire is in good taste) have been truly delightful people and great team members.

77

Option A: All tattoos are meaningless ink splotches.

Option B: Tattoos - at least some of them - have a meaning.

Which is your personal choice?

78

I 'm unsure why I am expected to both respect people’s right to free expression; and at the same time be disallowed from letting those expressive tattoos affect my impression of the person in question.

79

Maybe when you go to a tattoo parlor you are supposed to want the guy with the bad face tattoo instead of the guy with the good face tattoo, the same way you are supposed to want the barber with the bad haircut, not the good one?

80

If I ever get one, my back is about the only surface flat enough that something so large will look decent. So that’s where it would go. Specifically, left shoulder blade so it’s close to the heart, where my front has a bump that would distort the design greatly.

Since the design is symmetrical, seeing it in a mirror works just fine.