tattoos

[EdnaMode]

I've been reading this with interest and finally decided to comment. I have tattoos, didn't get my first one until I was in my early 30s. Only one of mine can be seen if I'm wearing a sleeveless shirt, and I often do. My brother, who works in corporate banking, wears a suit and tie pretty much every day, has sleeve tattoos from the elbow up, all over his chest and back, and a few on his legs. None of them can be seen at work. My person works in IT, he has full sleeves, from a couple inches above his wrists all the way up his arms, across his chest and back, and his legs are covered. He always wears long sleeves at work and none of his tattoos can be seen.

Just out of curiosity, were those choices of location, (i.e. places that could be covered by regular clothing), on purpose?  I'd be fascinated to know how many people who get tattoos make that decision up front. (I'd guess those who do would be less likely to regret them.)

Yes, I did deliberately choose locations that could be covered up. At the time of my first tattoo, I was working in industry with some VERY conservative people, some of whom were international and saw tattoos (and women in engineering for that matter) as something that was looked down upon. And since I've been in academia, I recognize that engineering is still a pretty conservative field. Long-haired men are generally about as far out of the norm as you'll see in my department and in the whole School of Engineering. My brother made his choices for the same reasons, corporate banking is pretty conservative. My partner was in the military before retiring from that and starting work in IT. At the time he served, he could not have any visible body art and even though he no longer has to abide by those rules, he says his body art is his business, not anyone else's.

[secundem_artem]

A number of years ago, I was visiting one of our overseas preceptors.  Came across a young man with a shaved head -- and a large swastika tattooed onto the side of his skull. I'm pretty sure he was not a student of ancient symbols on the Indian sub-continent.  I took it to be a message that he has no intention of ever getting a job and proposes to be a dole bludger his entire life. 

[apl68]

My partner was in the military before retiring from that and starting work in IT. At the time he served, he could not have any visible body art and even though he no longer has to abide by those rules, he says his body art is his business, not anyone else's.

And those of us who don't much care for tattoos do appreciate it when tattoo lovers show this sort of discretion about their business.

[marshwiggle]

A number of years ago, I was visiting one of our overseas preceptors.  Came across a young man with a shaved head -- and a large swastika tattooed onto the side of his skull. I'm pretty sure he was not a student of ancient symbols on the Indian sub-continent.  I took it to be a message that he has no intention of ever getting a job and proposes to be a dole bludger his entire life. 

This reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw many years ago on a van, which said,
"Gas, grass, or a**, nobody rides free."
I wondered if this owner had a mother, grandmother, sister, etc.; i.e. ANY woman he might need to give a lift to who might have found that sentiment awkward.

(I am assuming the owner was male, but I can't be sure.)

[Juvenal]

Dots for spots.  I admit I DO have some tattoos, but they are hard to find.  What they were were single dots on my flab for the aiming of prostate radiation.  I think those tats will have to do.  And I can't even find one of them (the flab problem).  The cancer appears gone (if you believe the PSA readings some years on).

[jerseyjay]

This reminds me of a bumper sticker I saw many years ago on a van, which said,
"Gas, grass, or a**, nobody rides free."
I wondered if this owner had a mother, grandmother, sister, etc.; i.e. ANY woman he might need to give a lift to who might have found that sentiment awkward.

(I am assuming the owner was male, but I can't be sure.)

For what it is worth, this is a common sticker on cars in my neighborhood. Again, for what it is worth, most of the cars' owners have tattoos.  As do many of their girlfriends, and sisters (and maybe their mothers, too.) Again, for what it is worth.

[Caracal]

My partner was in the military before retiring from that and starting work in IT. At the time he served, he could not have any visible body art and even though he no longer has to abide by those rules, he says his body art is his business, not anyone else's.

And those of us who don't much care for tattoos do appreciate it when tattoo lovers show this sort of discretion about their business.

I mean, that's fine, but I think it's weird to actually feel bothered by tattoos in general. It's like clothing, mostly I don't have any feelings about it at all on other people. Every once in a while I do register something someone is wearing because I think it's kind of cool, and sometimes I think "huh, weird choice," or, more often, as I descend into middle age "I guess that's a thing the kids wear these days."

Most of the time I don't notice anything other than that someone has a sleeve, or some kind of tattoo on their arm or leg. I can't usually make out the details without looking closely and staring intently at other people's bodies is something I try to avoid with most people I encounter at my work or theirs.

As for employment and the like, I suspect we are rapidly moving into a world in which someone at a job interview might want to cover a tattoo, but only for the same reason they might not want to wear sparkly shoes, or a pocket square in their coat. You don't want people focusing on the dragon on your arm rather than your qualifications. Once you get the job, the tattoo would be totally acceptable in the same way that these other sorts of slightly bold fashion statements would in all but the most conservative work environments.

[jerseyjay]

I mean, that's fine, but I think it's weird to actually feel bothered by tattoos in general.

From my perspective, tattoos seem to correlate to mainly age, and then to a lesser extent, class, geography, religion, and to some extent ethnicity and race. At my school, many (perhaps most) of the students tend to have visible tattoos. A fair number of the support staff (secretaries, janitors) have tattoos, some professors (especially younger humanists), and very, very few administrators. (Although I did notice that the new male budget person hired by my school, while having no visible tattoos, does have a rather prominent nose ring.)

In my neighborhood, the overwhelming majority of people between 18 and 40 have some sort of visible tattoos.

I have no idea how having a tattoo would affect the job search today. I assume that all tattoos are not equal. A prominent face tattoo is still more taboo than a discrete tattoo on one's inside wrist. I would imagine that a prominent swastika or SS ruins tattoo would still be bad for one's job prospects, but not necessarily because it is a tattoo per se.

   

[marshwiggle]

I have no idea how having a tattoo would affect the job search today. I assume that all tattoos are not equal. A prominent face tattoo is still more taboo than a discrete tattoo on one's inside wrist. I would imagine that a prominent swastika or SS ruins tattoo would still be bad for one's job prospects, but not necessarily because it is a tattoo per se.
   

My impression of extensive body art, including tattoos and piercings, is that part of what it is intended to convey is a willingness to defy conventional expectations. (People are free to disagree on that, but I'd be surprised if my opinion isn't shared by many other people.) If I'm hiring someone, such as a TA, I don't care if they disagree with my teaching philosophy, or my grading scheme, or my deadlines, but I need them to follow them while they are working for me. For that reason, any indication that I'm going to have justify everything I ask to their satisfaction is going to make me pass on hiring. (If they've taken a course from me, and have shown their willingness to follow the rules and check all of the boxes for me, then there's no problem.)

[nebo113]

So a

I have no idea how having a tattoo would affect the job search today. I assume that all tattoos are not equal. A prominent face tattoo is still more taboo than a discrete tattoo on one's inside wrist. I would imagine that a prominent swastika or SS ruins tattoo would still be bad for one's job prospects, but not necessarily because it is a tattoo per se.
   

My impression of extensive body art, including tattoos and piercings, is that part of what it is intended to convey is a willingness to defy conventional expectations. (People are free to disagree on that, but I'd be surprised if my opinion isn't shared by many other people.) If I'm hiring someone, such as a TA, I don't care if they disagree with my teaching philosophy, or my grading scheme, or my deadlines, but I need them to follow them while they are working for me. For that reason, any indication that I'm going to have justify everything I ask to their satisfaction is going to make me pass on hiring. (If they've taken a course from me, and have shown their willingness to follow the rules and check all of the boxes for me, then there's no problem.)

Yikes!  You are willing to assume that 1/3 of the US population is unsuitable to work for you because, clutching my pearls, ink indicates they won't follow the rules! 

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/15/32-of-americans-have-a-tattoo-including-22-who-have-more-than-one/

[marshwiggle]

So a

I have no idea how having a tattoo would affect the job search today. I assume that all tattoos are not equal. A prominent face tattoo is still more taboo than a discrete tattoo on one's inside wrist. I would imagine that a prominent swastika or SS ruins tattoo would still be bad for one's job prospects, but not necessarily because it is a tattoo per se.
   

My impression of extensive body art, including tattoos and piercings, is that part of what it is intended to convey is a willingness to defy conventional expectations. (People are free to disagree on that, but I'd be surprised if my opinion isn't shared by many other people.) If I'm hiring someone, such as a TA, I don't care if they disagree with my teaching philosophy, or my grading scheme, or my deadlines, but I need them to follow them while they are working for me. For that reason, any indication that I'm going to have justify everything I ask to their satisfaction is going to make me pass on hiring. (If they've taken a course from me, and have shown their willingness to follow the rules and check all of the boxes for me, then there's no problem.)

Yikes!  You are willing to assume that 1/3 of the US population is unsuitable to work for you because, clutching my pearls, ink indicates they won't follow the rules! 

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/15/32-of-americans-have-a-tattoo-including-22-who-have-more-than-one/

Note my highlighting of the word "extensive". Someone with a butterfly on their wrist is a lot different than someone who looks like a cast member from "Road Warrior". (That illustrates my point; there's a reason certain movies have characters with EXTENSIVE body art, including ink and multiple piercings on their faces.)

[Wahoo Redux]

Note my highlighting of the word "extensive". Someone with a butterfly on their wrist is a lot different than someone who looks like a cast member from "Road Warrior". (That illustrates my point; there's a reason certain movies have characters with EXTENSIVE body art, including ink and multiple piercings on their faces.)

I don't know that an apocalyptical dystopian fantasy movie from 1981 (when tats were actually a relative rarity) is a very good cultural barometer, my Marshbro.

The military's take on tattoos is evolving:

No military regulation has been more closely watched—and more frequently changed—than the do's and don'ts of tattoos. Last week, the Marine Corps revised its policy, allowing the "sleeve" (whole arm) tattoo and also permitting officers more than four tattoos visible in uniform. Both officers and enlisted can now tat themselves up as much as they want, as long as it's not on the face or neck. And hands may sport only one finger ring tattoo. The reason for the change is simple: recruiting and retention. Nearly half of young adults have tattoos, and many have several. The new "Marine Corps Bulletin 1020" emphasizes balance between decorum and practicality.

I suspect the armed forces are simply responding to the era when peeps are not so afraid of tats.

Who cares if people are tatted to the hilt or pure as a new bar of soap?

I suppose, following the basic rubric that tats indicate a rebel without a cause, we must negate the Maori people?  Or are we respectful of cultural traditions even if they are not the traditions we grew up with?

People are just funny.

[marshwiggle]

Note my highlighting of the word "extensive". Someone with a butterfly on their wrist is a lot different than someone who looks like a cast member from "Road Warrior". (That illustrates my point; there's a reason certain movies have characters with EXTENSIVE body art, including ink and multiple piercings on their faces.)

I don't know that an apocalyptical dystopian fantasy movie from 1981 (when tats were actually a relative rarity) is a very good cultural barometer, my Marshbro.

The military's take on tattoos is evolving:

No military regulation has been more closely watched—and more frequently changed—than the do's and don'ts of tattoos. Last week, the Marine Corps revised its policy, allowing the "sleeve" (whole arm) tattoo and also permitting officers more than four tattoos visible in uniform. Both officers and enlisted can now tat themselves up as much as they want, as long as it's not on the face or neck. And hands may sport only one finger ring tattoo. The reason for the change is simple: recruiting and retention. Nearly half of young adults have tattoos, and many have several. The new "Marine Corps Bulletin 1020" emphasizes balance between decorum and practicality.

I suspect the armed forces are simply responding to the era when peeps are not so afraid of tats.

Who cares if people are tatted to the hilt or pure as a new bar of soap?

I suppose, following the basic rubric that tats indicate a rebel without a cause, we must negate the Maori people?  Or are we respectful of cultural traditions even if they are not the traditions we grew up with?

People are just funny.

What about wearing a MAGA hat?

[bio-nonymous]

OK, I have read this thread with interest. I finally decided to comment:

#1: "Judge not, lest ye yourself be judged"

#2 Who cares what other random people look like? If they want to dress like Bozo the clown, what do I care? Why should I be offended by someone else's choices? Particularly some random person I do not know?

#3 IF they are a direct hire under my management and decide to come to the interview dressed like a Klingon I might be cautious--but a few tattoos? Whatever. Completely covered with piercings and potentially offensive tattoos on face/neck/hands--then I might question their judgement. BUT, I want to hire the best person for the job. If the genius programmer has "too many tattoos" and dresses weird, if they are not a front-facing employee who cares?

#4 Tattoos are a lifetime commitment, too many folks don't consider the future. That is why there are some with regrets. Removing tattoos is super-expensive and often doesn't work well--covering up dumn tats with more reasonable ones is often a better alternative.

#5 Employee shortage--companies need to hire whoever they can find--being picky about tattoos/piercings = problematic for staffing (and see #1 and #3)

[Parasaurolophus]

I suppose, following the basic rubric that tats indicate a rebel without a cause, we must negate the Maori people?  Or are we respectful of cultural traditions even if they are not the traditions we grew up with?

Closer to home, the Inuit also have a cultural practice of facial tattoos (tuniit)--for women.

I think culturally significant practices of body art/ modification are pretty cool. I think it's too bad ours doesn't really have much of that going for it.

I like pretty tattoos, regardless of where they are. Most of the tattoos most people have don't seem particularly pretty, but it's not my opinion that matters. And they're so widespread now that the cultural signification they had in '80s and '90s or earlier--viz., aggressiveness or transgressiveness--just doesn't apply any more. Facial tattoos are rare enough that they're probably an exception, but I, for one, don't really mind them.

I have no tattoos. My partner does.