Uncovered Tattoos and work.

[Spud1985]

Hainey said:

I used seven figures as a guide to the level of business not to get into willy waving, but instead to show we are not exactly selling penny sweets. I work in shipping (the floating type, not Yodel) and the sums that wash around can be quite considerable when it comes to builds and overhauls.

Can I see me sending someone with a full sleeve, a stretcher earing and a neck and hand tattoo to a Lloyd's dinner to represent me?

No, I honestly can't. I want my representative to be remembered for certain qualities and not as 'that guy or girl' who showed up looking like a Cat Von D test piece.

Whilst I admire those who swim against the tide for reasons of personal fulfillment I also have to consider the people in my organisation whom that rep has to win business for so those guys on the tools can pay their mortgage and put shoes on their children's feet.

Hence I'll take the conventional option.

Apologies it wasn't supposed to come across like that, my point was more to demonstrate i think its the type of business, industry or trade the individual is in more than the value of work involved where the views differ.

The description you've put i think would raise a few eyebrows in my line of work too and is on the extreme side, but i see your point.

[Spud1985]

WD39 said:

Spud, I would genuinely be interested in your thought process when deciding to extend to your hand.
Presumably all your previous tattoos could be covered.

When i had my originally had me sleeve done and stopped above my wrist i always thought it felt unfinished but couldn't find a design to finish it .... then i saw a few designs that i liked but they didn't quite fit without extending onto my hand, which again looked semi incomplete in my eyes, so i looked at other types of tattoo designs that were more hand based but that could also then be incorporated into my sleeve without looking like a completely separate tattoo, which led me to my final decision on what i had scribbled on me.

All previous tattoos could be covered if i wore long sleeve tops, but i never made a point of covering them up and would reguarly wear polo shirts, t-shirts and roll my sleeves up on my shirts in the summer, etc as most people do, so they would be visible more of the time than not.

i think due to this (having constant visible tattoos) it took a while for people to realise i had some further work done and i can honestly say i have not had or heard any negative comments after extending it onto my hand. As i said previously this may be due to the type of industry i am in and what is becoming acceptable and not. Or I'm just not aware of the potential negative comments it could be raising.

[Robertj21a]

Spud1985 said:

i think due to this (having constant visible tattoos) it took a while for people to realise i had some further work done and i can honestly say i have not had or heard any negative comments after extending it onto my hand. As i said previously this may be due to the type of industry i am in and what is becoming acceptable and not. Or I'm just not aware of the potential negative comments it could be raising.

It's the industry that you work in, not likely to raise any concerns from others (including any management). I think the main concerns are the very obvious face/neck tattoos when you work in a 'white collar' environment.

[andy-xr]

Got to laugh at the attitudes on here

'Oh well, yes you work in this industry which isn't as important as MY industry so you down there, Up here, we do very important things with lots of money. I approve of your industry being below mine so you might have a tattoo'

Its laughable.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

bad company said:

Robertj21a said:

I'm still wondering what the ladies with lots of prominent tattoos will think of them in years to come when the fashion has long passed.

That's a big problem imo. We all look back at photo's of us from years ago and laugh about our hair style and clothes we wore in those days. Tattoos are more permanent.

Absolutely. I look at old pics of myself and can't believe I wore those glasses, or those trousers, and that haircut!

Why doesn't that apply to tattoos. I heard a youngster in my office talking about some guy, and he said "He's got one of those really old fashioned tribal tattoos". I assume those bands around the upper arm, like a Maori or whatever, that people were into in the 90s.

[Rick101]

LOL, Lass in our office has one. Doesn't go all the way round though as you had to be well 'ard to have one of them. Proper Council. Much like we'll see all the 60 yr old women with the tramp stamp on the lower back from when they used to get it from behind. Very classy.

Saw a young lad other day with full facial tattoo. Nothing in particular, just loads of mess covering i'd say 90% of his face.

Honestly, I swear I am from a different age. I just can't understand why some people make the decisions they do.

[Hainey]

andy-xr said:

Got to laugh at the attitudes on here

'Oh well, yes you work in this industry which isn't as important as MY industry so you down there, Up here, we do very important things with lots of money. I approve of your industry being below mine so you might have a tattoo'

Its laughable.

No one on this thread, to their absolute credit, has said that at all. People have identified perhaps different norms in different industries and roles within, but no one has taken the approach you state or a position anything like it.

It's been a really good intelligent discussion on the new normal's and how they interact with the older industries and I would hope it continues as such and doesn't get trolled into a siding by comments such as yours.

[ChasW]

Hainey said:

andy-xr said:

Got to laugh at the attitudes on here

'Oh well, yes you work in this industry which isn't as important as MY industry so you down there, Up here, we do very important things with lots of money. I approve of your industry being below mine so you might have a tattoo'

Its laughable.

No one on this thread, to their absolute credit, has said that at all. People have identified perhaps different norms in different industries and roles within, but no one has taken the approach you state or a position anything like it.

It's been a really good intelligent discussion on the new normal's and how they interact with the older industries and I would hope it continues as such and doesn't get trolled into a siding by comments such as yours.

+1

I have followed this discussion from the beginning and made some contributions myself. I have to say I cannot see how anyone who had read the thread properly could infer one upmanship when the highly valid point of industry context was introduced.

[WD39]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

bad company said:

Robertj21a said:

I'm still wondering what the ladies with lots of prominent tattoos will think of them in years to come when the fashion has long passed.

That's a big problem imo. We all look back at photo's of us from years ago and laugh about our hair style and clothes we wore in those days. Tattoos are more permanent.

Absolutely. I look at old pics of myself and can't believe I wore those glasses, or those trousers, and that haircut!

Why doesn't that apply to tattoos. I heard a youngster in my office talking about some guy, and he said "He's got one of those really old fashioned tribal tattoos". I assume those bands around the upper arm, like a Maori or whatever, that people were into in the 90s.

Because trousers, hair and glasses can be quickly changed. Tattoos, unless removed, cannot.

[WD39]

andy-xr said:

Got to laugh at the attitudes on here

'Oh well, yes you work in this industry which isn't as important as MY industry so you down there, Up here, we do very important things with lots of money. I approve of your industry being below mine so you might have a tattoo'

Its laughable.

Although I think all tattoos are a mistake and a naive lifestyle choice, I can understand that some in some industries thay are accepted more easily than others.

My big concern is customer facing staff. As previously stated tattoos put out a poor image and attitude to the customer.

Many with tattoos have posted that they recieve no negative comments, but also posted earlier, it's what people are thinking that is important. They are unlikely to engage in conversation about the negative aspect of someones tattoos.

Edited by WD39 on Tuesday 4th October 11:42

[Countdown]

andy-xr said:

Got to laugh at the attitudes on here

'Oh well, yes you work in this industry which isn't as important as MY industry so you down there, Up here, we do very important things with lots of money. I approve of your industry being below mine so you might have a tattoo'

Its laughable.

It's not the "importance" of industries. It's just the standards/expectations of clothing / behaviour / language etc vary from industry to industry, and even from company to company. I dress the way accountants are supposed to dress (it's only recently that ties haven't become compulsory). And that's pretty much how every Accountant, Lawyer, Fund Manager FD or Actuary that I've worked with dresses However I work for a media company where tattoos, beards, skinny fit jeans, tshirts are the norm.

Horses for courses.

[Zoon]

Can anyone imagine a day where the UK elects a Prime Minister with a full face tattoo?
Me neither.

[xjay1337]

WD39 said:

Although I think all tattoos are a mistake and a naive lifestyle choice, I can understand that some in some industries thay are accepted more easily than others.

Why on earth do you consider something that doesn't effect you at all, to be a mistake or naive lifestyle choice?

Stuck up tt.

[andy-xr]

Hainey said:

No one on this thread, to their absolute credit, has said that at all. People have identified perhaps different norms in different industries and roles within, but no one has taken the approach you state or a position anything like it.

It's been a really good intelligent discussion on the new normal's and how they interact with the older industries and I would hope it continues as such and doesn't get trolled into a siding by comments such as yours.

ChasW said:

+1

I have followed this discussion from the beginning and made some contributions myself. I have to say I cannot see how anyone who had read the thread properly could infer one upmanship when the highly valid point of industry context was introduced.

You're missing the implicitness of it. People are speaking from their own experiences in a working day or life, and showing either their dislike or Meh either way relative to the trade they're in, whether they're customer facing, whether they as an employer want to hire someone.

If you want something more obvious, this post from Twig (and fair play to him for framing the point he has) would work

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I do, in certain circumstances. I personally think that visible tats (neck, hands, face) are a sign of very poor judgement. Even if you want them, you must know they aren't everyone's cup of tea and they will limit some opportunities, so to go ahead and get them regardless shows poor judgement and a "fk you world" attitude.

It wouldn't bother me if the person was fitting my tyres but I wouldn't be impressed if my financial adviser had them. I'd be looking for someone else to handle my money.

Of course, this is just my personal opinion, but that's the only opinion that matters when I make my choices.

What it comes down to is attractiveness and whether that person fits their scale of acceptability in how attractive they are to what that person wants to see from them.


It's not an opinion I share, but I'm sure he's very welcome to have his opinion.

Zoon said:

Can anyone imagine a day where the UK elects a Prime Minister with a full face tattoo?
Me neither.

So this isnt really about uncovered tattoos, more a face tattoo? In uncovered terms, Churchill already won that one with an anchor on his arm. Maybe the PH high horsed will use his poor judgement skills to say this was a bad idea. Samantha Cameron has an ankle tattoo. Not that it should be an issue either way, but perhaps some might see it that if she hadnt had her ankle tattoo'd then she might have been the PM instead of a wife, or some other such attitude.

In the US, Theodore Roosevelt had an emblem tattoeod on his chest. I dont think it's a pre-req that if you have a tattoo, then it must follow that you're going to tattoo your face. People place them where they want them

[RobinOakapple]

andy-xr said:

So this isnt really about uncovered tattoos, more a face tattoo? In uncovered terms, Churchill already won that one with an anchor on his arm. Maybe the PH high horsed will use his poor judgement skills to say this was a bad idea. Samantha Cameron has an ankle tattoo. Not that it should be an issue either way, but perhaps some might see it that if she hadnt had her ankle tattoo'd then she might have been the PM instead of a wife, or some other such attitude.

In the US, Theodore Roosevelt had an emblem tattoeod on his chest. I dont think it's a pre-req that if you have a tattoo, then it must follow that you're going to tattoo your face. People place them where they want them

It's certainly possible to come up with all sorts of examples as to why people shouldn't judge others on the basis of whether or not they have tattoos.

But then people also shouldn't smoke, or eat too much, or spend too much, or steal stuff or drive too fast etc etc.

People, being people, will continue to do whatever they want, whether they should do it or not.

[ChasW]

xjay1337 said:

WD39 said:

Although I think all tattoos are a mistake and a naive lifestyle choice, I can understand that some in some industries thay are accepted more easily than others.

Why on earth do you consider something that doesn't effect you at all, to be a mistake or naive lifestyle choice?

Stuck up tt.

Ironically your reponse indicates a degree of naivety.

You are participating in a discussion forum. The clue is in the title as to what it is. People share their points of view, opinions and experiences and a discussion, hopefully mature, ensues. Normally this happens without the need to hurl an insult at someone you don't agree with. I doubt whether you'd behave the same way if you were having the same discussion over a pint in the pub. So why here?

[WD39]

xjay1337 said:

WD39 said:

Although I think all tattoos are a mistake and a naive lifestyle choice, I can understand that some in some industries thay are accepted more easily than others.

Why on earth do you consider something that doesn't effect you at all, to be a mistake or naive lifestyle choice?

Stuck up tt.

Every time I am dealing with customer contact staff with tattoos my thoughts are not favourable.
It is out of place and manifests a negative image.
No, I would never verbally challenge a tattood employee, that would be rude and is not my style. I would vote with my feet.

That is how it affects me. (sticks and stones etc.)

[bad company]

WD39 said:

Every time I am dealing with customer contact staff with tattoos my thoughts are not favourable.
It is out of place and manifests a negative image.
No, I would never verbally challenge a tattood employee, that would be rude and is not my style. I would vote with my feet.

That is how it affects me. (sticks and stones etc.)

Me also.

I don't have such a problem with small discreet, out of sight tattoos tho.

[Zoon]

andy-xr said:

People place them where they want them

Or don't bother at all.

[andy-xr]

Zoon said:

andy-xr said:

People place them where they want them

Or don't bother at all.

Well, they wouldnt place them anywhere if they didnt want them. There's probably a large swathe of people who'd quite fancy a tattoo, but cant/wont/dont because of some expectation that they think they need to conform to, however real or not that might be. And equally there might be people who dont want a taoo at any time or any place, and that's fine too.