Another vote for paw print tattoos on a woman’s upper boob area.
I mean, lots of tattoos are not exactly synonymous with class, but you don’t have to have tats that scream “SKANK!!!”
Barcode tattoos, especially on the back of the neck. Hate those.
For those in the know, does a tattoo like that mean you’re committed to religiously waxing your chest?
One of my stepsons has one on his arm. One day I was reading a different tattoo thread and someone mentioned that those might be offensive to Jews. I had never thought of that interpretation before, and I wondered if my stepson had. I’m sure that’s not what he meant by it! Anyway, still lame.
My other stepson, age sixteen, also has a tattoo. He did the artwork himself. It’s on his back and is meant to depict a ninja coming out of his spine. (Representing the anger, you know, inside himself, man.) Looks more like a wicked elf to me.
More or less. I shave it a few times a week anyway.
There are far too many people here assuming that those of us with tattoos do it for other people. I could give two shits what anyone else thinks about my tattoos. I got them for me, because I like the way I look. Because they make me feel that how I look matches who I feel like inside. Because it makes me smile when I look in the mirror. Because without them I didn’t feel like me.
I have plenty more planned, the only things holding me back are the time to get it done and the money to travel to the artist I want to have do them. And as for how I’ll look when I’m old? I’ll look a hell of a lot more interesting than any of my wrinkly non-tattooed counterparts. I’ll have a lot bigger things to worry about when I get old and flabby, like making sure I can retire comfortably and have good health care.
“Interesting” may not be the way you’ll want to go, of course.
Or perhaps you’ll argue yourself into so defensive a position that you’ll insist that you like the way your tattoos look in sixty years no matter how you really feel. That’s the way I’ll bet.
You’re arguing against a strawman here, I think: no one thinks that you get tattoos in order to disturb others. I do think I may judge you on the basis on your tattoos, though, just as you judge me for my lack of tattoos, my white hair, my beard, my paisley tie, etc. If I’m hiring, I may well choose one qualified candidate over another on the basis of which one has no tattoos (and thus good judgment, maturity, etc.) and which one looks like a circus freak, especially if there’s exposure to a non-tattooed public involved.
So I’m deluding myself into thinking I like them? Of course, no one with tattoos could actually enjoy they way they look, we’re all just fooling ourselves into thinking that. :rolleyes:
And I never claimed that people wouldn’t judge me. You’re the one arguing against a strawman. What I did say is that I was not motivated in the least by other people’s perceptions, good or bad. I’m fully aware of the negative aspects - I just don’t care.
And the idea that visible tattoos or piercings will keep you out of a good job is just a myth. We’ve been through this before. I’ve never had the slightest problem getting a job or getting promoted, and I’ve worked with the public, and served as a representative of my company to my clients for years. I’ve been a hiring manager, and I’ve been a supervisor as well as a consultant to my clients. Not once have my modifications ever come into question at all. I know plenty of other modified professionals in the same position. About the only places I’ve personally seen this kind of discrimination in place is, ironically enough, places like McDonalds or Burger King. When it comes to the modern professional workplace, it seems to be mostly a non-issue.
Edited to add: And the idea that tattoos = good judgment and maturity is no more rational than saying someone with green pants is more qualified to be a rocket scientist. You’re welcome to your opinions, but don’t try and pretend you’re being rational about your discrimination.
It may be evidence you’re providing that tattoos have no effect on hiring, or it may be utterly anomalous anecdotes, or even psychotically defensive rationalizations–I have no way of knowing which. Whatever works for you. I have no problem with your personal choices, other than that they seem ugly and unnecessary for my own personal tastes. As to your green pants analogy, I’d say visible tattoos are more like total nudity in hiring a rocket scientist: it maybe not constitute a causal reason not to hire someone (a nude scientist could do first-rate work) but it might signal a spirit that’s maybe a tad too flamboyant to work with others. All things being equal, I’ll hire scientists with clothes, scientists without a plank embedded in their skulls, etc., but maybe that’s just me.
Maybe you could link to one of the threads on which we’ve discussed this before–I’d be curious to see what a study would show of job applicants with visible ink. I’d be amazed if your experience of being eminently employable is quite as universal as you’d have me believe, but maybe I’ll be amazed.
Considering that roughly 36 percent of 25-29 year olds are tattooed and the skilled labor force is dwindling, companies are going to have to be okay with it.
You’ll find plenty of studies where employers say they won’t hire someone with tattoos, but my experience and the experience of my modified friends all prove otherwise. If you’re smart and you have the skills to do the job, tattoos aren’t an issue. How people say they will behave when surveyed and how they actually do are sometimes vastly different things.
I bet you’d flip if you realized just how many people around you are sporting ink. From doctors to lawyers, teachers, and everywhere in between you’ll find plenty of modified professionals that do their jobs just as well as their non-modified counterparts (and quite often, better).
Your bias is based on nothing more than fear and discrimination. Whether or not it’s your cup of tea, tattoos are no reason to disqualify someone for a job they are otherwise well qualified for. I manage to interact with and advocate on behalf of my incredibly conservative, state government clients just fine despite my ink and piercings. I’ve built up quite a wonderful reputation and I’ve been specifically asked to work in Marketing now to help bring in more business, which means face time with potential clients. Ink in my skin doesn’t make me mentally or socially incompetent.
It’s just my opinion, but that seems to reinforce my idea it’s more of a generational thing, tying like-aged people together.
Are you saying a tattooed doctor or lawyer does his/her job better than a non-tattooed one? Why? What would cause that?
Some years ago, I was doing implementation work for a group of large hospitals. This entailed visiting over 50 of their sites, and working closely with the individual materials managers. One of these fellows stood out, he was not only heavily tattooed, with a spiderweb on his head, among many others, but he was flamingly gay. His office was decorated with beefcake calendars, and all his staff were young men.
He also had a wall of awards for best materials manager in the system, and was regularly a host to corporate bigwigs. From him I learned that if you’re really good at your job, your appearance and lifestyle don’t matter much, even in a conservative setting.
“Discrimination” is a strong word. Tattoos are part of the whole package when you’re hiring someone, and it gets weighed in judgement like their haircut, their clothes, their cologne/perfume, their fingernails (long, dirty, ragged, etc.), and many things like that. You can certainly argue that people operating in a hiring capacity are discriminating in the truest meaning of the word - they are differentiating and recognizing differences between people. I think you’d be hard-pressed to argue discrimination in the legal sense of the word for modifications that people have chosen to make to their bodies.
The problem is that discriminating on a false basis is, yunno, kind of stupid. You’ve repeated some claims about people with tattoos several times, but so far that has not magically made them true. So you’re still dealing in stereotypes rather than “recognizing differences.”
Being a professional does not automatically mean you’re really smart or show great judgement; the only thing it really means for sure is that you studied and did your homework and got into med school / law school / business school / etc. I saw a doctor on tv last night who didn’t want to deliver a baby on Friday the 13th. That’s right up there with ‘face tattoo’ on the judgement scale as far as I’m concerned, but it didn’t stop her from getting her M.D.
This was refreshing to see. Finally someone with tattoos saying they understand some people won’t like their tattoos. Too many tattoo defenders seem to think that if you don’t like tattoos, you suck. However, I disagree with this:
I feel having visable tattoos is a disadvantage to getting most jobs. It doesn’t mean you won’t get hired, but it’s a strike against you. Given the choice between two awesome, capable applicants, most employers will select the untattooed one. So the tattooed candidate now has to be even more awesome just to overcome the perception of the tattoo.
Having a tattoo would either be advantageous, neutral, or disadvantageous in getting a job. Other than some edgy professions, I feel that tattoos are mostly disadvantageous in getting a job.
You don’t see a lot of invisible ones, at any rate.
Agreed, but there’s something to the thing about personal appearance. If someone comes in with a really bad hairstyle (not edgy or trying to be cool, just generally having no sense that there’s something wrong with that style) and terrible fashion sense, you begin to wonder what else that person might not quite “get.” You could take the chance on hiring them and hope that they do well, but if you have other qualified candidates, you’re probably going to go for one of them. Of course, this is assuming that the person doesn’t have a long resume with glowing reviews, in which case you can probably assume that they can do the work that they’ve already clearly been doing.
Now I don’t see tattoos as an indication that that person might be not “getting” something else, but featherlou and others are pointing out that some hiring mangagers might see them as such an indication. It’s stupid, and it’s changing, but it is still out there.
I’ve got one tattoo, a small spiral on one hand. Got it done a few years ago.
I’ll probably get more done (have a few in mind) but it’s not a burning desire, or anything.
I thnk one of my favorites, in terms of the story behind it, is Johnny Depp’s “Wino Forever” tat…After he and Winona Ryder split and he decided to remove it, found the process too painful (“like someone standing on the moon with a stretched rubber band and popping you with it” was how he described it if I recall correctly) so stopped after a few letters. At least it worked out to be something he could live with. 
I’ve read somewhere that he expressed the sentiment re’ tattoos in general that he considers them like a journal of his life, and so wouldn’t regret them. (but unless he has a hidden one, seems he learned his lesson about inking on the names of lovers…kids, yes, lovers, no!:smack:)
I think the real qualifier is the nature of the ink - for one, most of the professionals photographed for Inked Inc may have substantial tattooing, but it can all be hidden by clothing if the occasion calls for it. Their employers wouldn’t see the ink if they were dressed up professionally for an interview.
Thing is, there’s a world of difference between getting full sleeves you can cover up if need be, and getting a face/neck/hand tattoo that will be visible 24/7. It works fine for someone Lil’ Wayne who doesn’t need to be taken seriously, but I don’t think I could apply for a mortgage from a banker with “Only God Can Judge Me” written up the side of his neck, get my teeth cleaned by a dentist who has “Love/Hate” on his knuckles, or hire a cleaning lady who has a teardrop on her cheekbone. It’s a sign of poor judgment, IMO.
I actually worry about how well my sister will do in applying for academic jobs next year… she’s got plugs in her ears along with several earrings, a nose ring, a large tattoo on her lower back and another one on her shoulder, and has a fashion sense that’s more skate-punk that button-down professional… she believes her work will speak for itself, but the universities may have trouble believing she’ll be able to command respect from her classes if she looks more like a student than a professor.
For the record, I’ve got a small tattoo on my upper back. Most of my coworkers have no idea it’s there. I also worked for a while with a girl who has full sleeves that looked fantastic, but was always careful to wear long sleeves at the office because she felt it was the appropriate thing to do.