I think I’d take it as a given, in a thread asking for advice on the topic, that the subject is not going to be obviously offensive tattoos, racist-type or otherwise.
To me, the issue is narrower: is getting a visible-when-wearing-business-type-attire tattoos that are not in and of themselves intentionally offensive or intented to be frightening, a bad idea because they harm your chances of employment? Assume that the tattoos are intended to be decorative or to have some benign meaning - say, a purely decorative motif or pattern.
To my mind, the answer is that they will cost you, in terms of creating an additional barrier to acceptance. They will not be fatal, and if you are really talented and/or already established, or in an industry such as entertainment, you could well do it and succeed just fine.
The issue is whether the cost, in terms of impact on one’s chances of success and/or limiting of options, is worth the self-expression; that is of course an individual decision. I’d not do it unless I was already established in some field, and knew the score. But then, I’m not very attracted to the notion of permanent tattooing in the first place.
You are arguing against what you think my position is, rather than what my position actually is; it’s like you’ve only read every other sentence of every other post. For someone who throws the word “strawman” around the way you do, your posts are remarkably ironic.
I have not taken an absolutist position (this is one of the sentences you will fail to read); I am fighting against Shot From Gun’s absolutist position. What you call a “strawman” of “all tattoos are always good all the time” *is *in fact the position I am arguing against.
I have said repeatedly, and you have failed to read repeatedly, that I do not have a problem with tattoos in general. I have said repeatedly, and you have failed to read repeatedly, that there are even some face tattoos that I don’t have a problem with (you will also fail to read this sentence).
Now, I do think that face tattoos in general are a sign of bad judgement (and I explained why, in one of the sentences you failed to read). In fact, I think visible tattoos in general are a sign of bad judgement. My company would not hire someone with a visible tattoo, and I would not hire someone with a visible tattoo if a equivalent alternative was available, but that’s not an absolutist position, no matter how much you wish it were so.
I just said that it is possible to hold an office job while expressing your interest in body art. How the hell did that become me disliking or disapproving of tattoos? I told the OP of an anecdote of a friend of mine who has to cover all her tattoos to the point of wearing long sleeves and high collars all the time. My decision? No. Her employers decision - yes.
You are way out in left field quoting me for your little (oft-repeated in this thread by others) bitch-fest. Allow me to reiterate: I’m fine with it - knock your fucking socks off. Tattoo yourself from one end to the other. Whatever floats your boat (my personal motto). However, there are companies that do have sticks up their butt, and if tattoos mean that much to you, don’t let that shit stop you from expressing yourself, but be prepared to wear long sleeve shirts in the summer.
Since when the fuck does what someone wear on a beach matter to an employment situation anyway. Go bitch at someone else - cause its not me that you have the argument with.
Uh. Um. I was ranting at corporate hacks. Not at your post. Your post inspired my post, which is why I quoted it. Ok? I wasn’t bitching at you at all, and I apologize profusely since it clearly seemed that way to you.
You are right- it ISN’T YOU I have the argument with. Clear?
As far as what you just wrote? Heck, what the fuck does someone’s Facebook photos have to do with their employment situation anyway? Nothing- except for when it costs people their jobs.
then it sounds like we’re in agreement: lots of people out in the employment world will judge us on factors that we would prefer they not. However, since none of these factors are protected class issues, then the onus is on us to decide if we want those judgmental assholes to see the kinds of things that they would clearly not like.
But guess what - it does happen - your cites prove it happens. So ultimately OP: yes you can be judged negatively just for having tattoos. Sounds like there are lots of us who wish it wasn’t that way, but as my hero Billy Bob Thornton said “Wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which fills up faster”
ETA: I guess he’s not technically my hero - but Bad Santa is one hilarious movie!
Yeah, you’re right, no one would be stupid enough to say that not hiring someone because of their tattoo is exactly equivalent to not hiring someone because they married a black person, so everything I have said must be a strawman.
It’s not about your tattoos, it’s about a business’s bottom line. This thread is about visible tattoos. You can cut your hair to fit what an employer is looking for but you can’t cover a visible tattoo.
HORRARS OF HORRARS, I was at a Cub scout leadership meeting. There was a Den mom there with a watch on her left hand and TATTOO FLAMES WERE SEEPING OUT THE EDGES.
I was a tattoo artist for 15 years, and I have a big celtic tattoo on my forearm. I have a word tattood under my watchband and letters on the fingers of one of my hands. I was in later years strung on dope. As far as I was concerned society could go ****off. If you said I’d regret anything, I’d have laughed.
Fastforward and I clean up and decide I want to be respectable. I am in RN school. I want the tattoos to disappear. If one more person asks me what the “*****” on my wrist and fingers mean, I might knock em out.
You can be put together perfect. Everything looks like class from your hair to your feet. You know you’re making a great impression, but you can always sense the exact moment when they see your tattoos.
What do the “****” on your wrist and fingers mean?
Seriously though, if they say what I’m guessing they say, the problem isn’t that they’re tattoos, it’s that they’re specifically angry, fuck-the-world, anti-social tattoos. There’s a difference there.
