Tattoos and Piercings

[GwenRaiden]

What's your take body art? Do you have any tattoos? Any piercings?

Do you find them offensive? Do you think it's right for employers to discriminate against those who have (visible) tattoos or piercings, be it by lack of promotion and treated differently in the workplace or not being offered a job in the first place?

I read an article earlier today about police officers (and recruits) in the UK getting tattoos laser removed as those with body art are more likely to be snubbed for promotion.

The staff magazine of London’s Metropolitan Police 'The Job' even had an advert for tattoo removal at £35 a time, with the line "Tattoos holding you back?".

Obviously I'm not only talking about police, it's just an example.

Would something like that about the job you really want put you off if you had ink? Would you really consider getting your tattoos or piercings removed?

Another question: what's your thoughts on parents getting their baby's ears pierced? It's quite common in the UK. You see it all the time.
I think piercing places vary with what ages babies can have their ears pierced, the most-used chain store called 'Claire's' states on their website the youngest age they accept is four months old. There was also a petition set up this year in the UK, with 33,000 signatures, asking the children's minister to set a minimum age requirement and a ban on piercing the ears of babies and toddlers.

Is it selfish vanity on the parent's part? There are cultural reasons for young children to get piercings. Is it comparable to child abuse? Would you get your baby's ears pierced? Did you get yours pierced as a baby or child? Do you think the people who signed the petition are the same kind of person as listed above, anti-body art and find the whole idea offensive and are prejudice against it regardless of age?

 

[Skanky Vamp]

What's your take body art?

I don't care

Do you have any tattoos?

Yup

Any piercings?

Nope

Do you find them offensive?

Only if they are offensive

Do you think it's right for employers to discriminate against those who have (visible) tattoos

Yup

or piercings

Nope. Unless they refuse to remove them, then yup.

 

[Fuffy]

What's your take body art? Do you have any tattoos? Any piercings?

I'm perfectly fine with people doing body art on themselves.

I don't have any tattoos.

I have 2 piercings in each ear.

Do you find them offensive? Do you think it's right for employers to discriminate against those who have (visible) tattoos or piercings, be it by lack of promotion and treated differently in the workplace or not being offered a job in the first place?

I don't find them offensive.

I don't think that discriminating employees that have tattoos or piercings is the acceptable thing to do, they should be offered the job based on how well they do the job, not based on how many tattoos they have.

Would something like that about the job you really want put you off if you had ink? Would you really consider getting your tattoos or piercings removed?

Honestly, it would definitely put me off, unless I was really desperate for the job.

I wouldn't remove my piercings unless I had no choice.

what's your thoughts on parents getting their baby's ears pierced?

I don't think that parent's should pierce their baby's ears, they should wait until the kid is old enough to take care of the piercing (especially in the first few weeks) and the kid has explicitly stated that they want to get their ears pierced.

Is it comparable to child abuse? Would you get your baby's ears pierced? Did you get yours pierced as a baby or child? Do you think the people who signed the petition are the same kind of person as listed above, anti-body art and find the whole idea offensive and are prejudice against it regardless of age?

I wouldn't compare it to child abuse, but I think it's like taking the privilege of free will away from the baby in a way.

If I had a baby, I wouldn't get their ears pierced.

I got my first set of piercings later than most girls, I explicitly agreed to doing it.

 

[Taake]

What's your take body art?
Love it! I think it's beautiful. Well... mostly. There are obviously some less awesome variations of body art out there. I, for one, am no fan of large chest tattoos on girls or face tattoos on anyone.

Do you have any tattoos? Any piercings?
Plenty of them 🙂 I used to have four piercings (not counting ears) I took them out years ago though, I still loved them I just went through a period where it seemed like a huge hassle all of a sudden. I'd had them since I was about 17 and I think I took them out when I was around 24-25 so, maybe I was just over it. I wouldn't mind getting them again though.

Do you find them offensive?
I'm parroting Poleman - only if they're offensive!

Do you think it's right for employers to discriminate against those who have (visible) tattoos or piercings, be it by lack of promotion and treated differently in the workplace or not being offered a job in the first place?
No. You shouldn't be treated differently. Though it also depends on the job, some might be less suited for that kind of appearance and maybe you just have to deal with that.

Would something like that about the job you really want put you off if you had ink? Would you really consider getting your tattoos or piercings removed?
I would consider getting my ink removed if I suddenly felt like I didn't want them. Though to be fair I would probably just get them removed and replace them with something new. I wouldn't do it for a job. Or rather I can't se myself doing it for a job. I've never had a problem at any job due to them.


Another question: what's your thoughts on parents getting their baby's ears pierced? It's quite common in the UK. You see it all the time.
The only time I've heard of piercing a baby's ears was on Friends. I've never met anyone here who has done it. I would not say that it is child abuse, that's a bit harsh! It is a bit selfish though. I would say that you should wait until the child can make their own decision about it.

 

[Nix]

I have a couple of tattoos. piercings only in my ears. I don't find them offensive. I disagree with baby/toddler ear piercings...they have no choice. I don't think body art should be discriminated against in any way... its the same as general grooming, your style is your choice as it's your body. Expression should be accepted.

 

[GwenRaiden]

I've never met anyone here who has done it.

Lucky you! Seriously. I may move to Sweden. I hate seeing it. It's so so common here.

I didn't get my ears pierced until I was about 12. Until I knew I really wanted them done. My parents both pierced their ears themselves as teenagers (yes, they have been together since they were 15, so 35 years), anyway, my dad's ended up badly infected and he still has problems with that ear until today. So yeah, I'd suggest always getting pierced by a professional.

I also have a Monroe (I refuse to call it a 'Madonna' because I hate Madonna), plus it's on the Monroe side of the face. I'd prefer it if the piercing places called it a 'Winehouse'. I am such a Winehouse.

 

[Mr Trick]

Don't have anything against them its a personal choice, but they just don't add anything to me and is not something which I would do. It can look really bad when people over do it and have too many.

 

[GwenRaiden]

Don't have anything against them its a personal choice

It can look really bad when people over do it and have too many.

I don't get it.
 

Mr Trick: Me neither, but each to their own

I meant, I didn't understand your statement as you contradicted yourself. Surely if it's personal choice then "too many" to you isn't too many for others. As it's their choice to decide.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

I saw a chick the other day and she just had way too many tats.


but then I saw this guy that had a bunch too, so I figure whatever

 

[Blaze]

(ignore the fact that I'm not suppose to come on here because of work).

I absolutely love tats and piercings. I got my tongue, lip, and ears pierced (and in the case of the ears I have a small gauge). Got 4 tattoos, and the next one will get done this fall. If I could be covered, I would (unfortunately tattoos are expensive).

I don't think people should be discriminated against at work because of tattoos/piercings. Body art doesn't influence whether you're qualified or not, and frankly I find it stupid if someone was to prevent the best doctor in the world from practicing because of it (extreme example, but you see the point).

Luckily it's not a problem for me since I work behind closed door, and no one from the public sees me. Even so, I'd never remove any of my body art because of a job (and yes, I have quit a job before because of it).

Edit: oh and concerning children, I do believe parents should wait until the child is old enough to make the decision. I think when it comes to ear piercing, even a young child (10-12yo) can make that decision. But certainly not a 2 yo.

 

[brinkster130]

I don't have any strong feelings about tattoos and piercings in general. Sometimes they are interesting and/or beautiful, other times I wonder what the person was thinking.

I myself have a small tattoo and my ears pierced (I know, I'm so crazy!) and I honestly don't think I'll get anymore even though I would like too. Main reason being future employers; I don't want to deal with having to hid them or worry about being judged by them. (Which doesn't bug me all that much, it's human nature to judge and often tattoos and piercings don't look professional)

Don't like the idea of baby/child piercings. Culturally speaking I'm sure there are places where it isn't as problematic, but for me personally, I think people should choose it for themselves.

I wouldn't be surprised if the tattoo removal industry really takes off in the near future.

 

[Mr Trick]

(ignore the fact that I'm not suppose to come on here because of work).

I absolutely love tats and piercings. I got my tongue, lip, and ears pierced (and in the case of the ears I have a small gauge). Got 4 tattoos, and the next one will get done this fall. If I could be covered, I would (unfortunately tattoos are expensive).

I don't think people should be discriminated against at work because of tattoos/piercings. Body art doesn't influence whether you're qualified or not, and frankly I find it stupid if someone was to prevent the best doctor in the world from practicing because of it (extreme example, but you see the point).

Luckily it's never been a problem for me since I work behind closed door, and no one from the public sees me. Even so, I'd never remove any of my body art because of a job (and yes, I have quit a job before because of it).

Even though I don't see the appeal of them, I totally agree with your point and admire you for making such a stand. These things are part of the modern world and people just need to deal with it.

 

[brinkster130]

These things are part of the modern world and people just need to deal with it.

I don't get this; I mean in so many different industries the need to look professional is a part of the job. Why is it ok for employers to makes employees dress and groom a certain way but not ok for them to require tattoos and piercings be covered or removed while at work?

(I absolutely think people have the right to do whatever they want to their bodies when it comes to tattoos and piercings; I just don't think it's something that should have to be accommodated by all)

 

[Mr Trick]

I don't get this; I mean in so many different industries the need to look professional is a part of the job. Why is it ok for employers to makes employees dress and groom a certain way but not ok for them to require tattoos and piercings be covered or removed while at work?

(I absolutely think people have the right to do whatever they want to their bodies when it comes to tattoos and piercings; I just don't think it's something that should have to be accommodated by all)

Well maybe covered up I don't know. Thing is it is still possible for someone to look smart while being covered with tattoos or piercings, and like Blaze said it has no bearing on their ability to do a good job.

 

[Blaze]

I don't get this; I mean in so many different industries the need to look professional is a part of the job. Why is it ok for employers to makes employees dress and groom a certain way but not ok for them to require tattoos and piercings be covered or removed while at work?

(I absolutely think people have the right to do whatever they want to their bodies when it comes to tattoos and piercings; I just don't think it's something that should have to be accommodated by all)

I guess for me it comes down to whether the tattoos/piercings affect the work. For example, usually a work dress code has a certain purpose. Like a mechanic wears overalls, a scientist wears a lab coat, a nurse wears scrubs. All that is for a certain purpose. But a tattoo won't affect any of those purposes. Piercings maybe, I can see why some jobs would ask for the removal of piercings (like doctors might get them ripped off by an angry patient, that stuff makes sense). But I don't see how a tattoo would prevent a doctor from doing it's job and saving lives.

If a job could convince me that there is a valid reason for hiding tattoos, than I will respect that, but the truth is that it really does not matter for most jobs.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

Body art doesn't influence whether you're qualified or not,

But it does when the contract states that you have no visible piercings or body art. Then you, by the terms of the contract, are not qualified. It's no different than having to submit to your weekly drug testing. The contract called for it.. if you did not you were no longer qualified to work there.

And I fully support an employers right to say "no visible body art"

 

[Lyri]

I love tattoos and if I could, I would be covered in them. Only problem is, I have a major needle phobia and keep putting it off, lol.

I have two piercings in each ear - and one of those was because I took my sister to get her ears pierced when she was 16 and wouldn't do it unless she saw someone else getting it done first. I was the helpless 'volunteer'.

As for other piercings, that's a no go for me. Like I said, major needle phobia, and while getting my ears pierced was fine, everything else I'd run a mile from. I went with a friend to book an appointment to get her tongue pierced (gross) and the guy told me that my tongue was too short to pierce, if I ever thought about it. My tongue doesn't even reach the bottom of my bottom lip, lol.

I don't think it's right that people are being held back by their tattoos. Unless it's something deeply offense or has the possibility of causing upset, then there's no reason to deny someone a job/promotion or look down on them. My job has a rule that all visible tattoos must be tasteful and any that aren't should be covered. Simple, if you ask me. Katie Hopkin's opinion of 'if you have a tattoo you aren't going to get a job' is both wrong and harmful.

About piercing babies' ears, no, I don't think it's right. I don't think it amounts to child abuse, but I don't think there's any need for it other than for people to look at the baby and think how cute she is with her little hoops. I think it should be up to the individual when they want their ears pierced, if they even do at all. I was 16 when I got my first piercings, so was my sister. We were able to make up our own minds. I don't like the idea of choices being taken out of their hands.

 

[Blaze]

But it does when the contract states that you have no visible piercings or body art. Then you, by the terms of the contract, are not qualified. It's no different than having to submit to your weekly drug testing. The contract called for it.. if you did not you were no longer qualified to work there.

And I fully support an employers right to say "no visible body art"

My point is more that contracts shouldn't state such a thing. To me it's just silly that you'd prevent an extremely qualified professional (speaking education wise) from practicing his job based on his tattoos.

As it is, obviously if you sign such a contract, you accept the term of it and that's on you. Gotta respect what you signed.

 

[Lyri]

Exactly. It shouldn't be in the contract in the first place, because having a tattoo has no basis on whether or not you can do the job. Like I said, offensive tattoos, yes, absolutely employers should have the right to ask for them to be covered. But a music note behind the ear? A butterfly on the wrist? No reason to ask for them to be covered.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

My point is more that contracts shouldn't state such a thing. To me it's just silly that you'd prevent an extremely qualified professional (speaking education wise) from practicing his job based on his tattoos.

But as an employer, you should have that right, depending on the circumstances to state that. If you wish to disqualify a candidate solely on the fact that they have a tattoo or piercing you find objectionable, that's fine by me. It's your business. Neither I, nor the government should be able to dictate how your run your business, as long as it is not breaking laws.