Is this a tattoo era?

[Monocrom]

And that's the way it should be in all cases where style or dress or appearance doesn't directly bear on the job itself. Whether you're straight or gay, man or woman, tattooed and pierced or not tattooed and pierced, democrat or republican, atheist or christian, etc. --all of that has no bearing. The only question should be "How well can this person do the job?" Period.

And that's just it. You're talking about how it should be. I made mention of how it is. If you're very skilled at what you do, then certainly your appearence will be overlooked in many cases. But it also depends on what line of work you're in. If it's something where you don't need to interact with the public, then a non-"clean cut" appearence won't matter to an employer. On the other hand, the Banker example is a perfect illustration of what I mean. The guy could be incredibly intelligent... But he's not getting the Banker's job that requires him to interact with the public. Namely because the public, by and large, won't deal with someone in a suit & tie and facial tattoo. They just won't. No, that's not how it should be... just the way it is. They'll go to a different bank, or perhaps ask to speak with a more "normal" Banker. (Normal in their eyes).

As for the young man with the long hair, keep in mind; you have skills that are in demand. He doesn't. He likely found a different job, but the Doorman position came with good pay & benefits. He could have used that good pay to go back to school and aquire some in-demand skills. But with a lesser paying job in which he doesn't have to cut his hair, he's going to have less money to better himself. It'll take him longer to save up for a higher education, shaving years off his life. In that way, his refusal to cut his hair did indeed effect his future.

 

[McGizmo]

js & jtr,
Good comments and thoughts! :thumbsup:

I have been a non conformist most of my life and by non conformist I mean conforming for the sake of conforming and especially in areas where any conforming was contrary to my personal values or preferences.

I do see some irony in the new wave of tat's where some people are in fact conforming to this new "order" in desire to "fit in". I make this statement because it has been my perception all along that many are followers, plain and simple and they are best suited as followers. That they have options and alternatives of who they choose to follow is a good thing, IMHO.

Reality is subject to enhancement, alteration, spin and deceit. The reality of our physical appearance and being is included. At least in the case of tattoos, they are what they are and likely rather obvious. For want of a better term, there is an honesty in tattoos that is lacking in many other avenues one can follow when altering their person.

Unlike other styles and fashions which change easily and can be embraced or ignored, there is a permanence to tattoos which does raise the significance for the individual at least.

A new tattoo may be an obvious change in a person's appearance but I would think the important thing would be is there any change in the person them self. I would imagine that the significance could range from an almost trivial cosmetic change to something of great personal significance and substance. A book's cover and claims are just that. The truth is within should anyone care to find it.

 

[Greta]

HA!! Check this out!... the "Star" chick lied!

 

[StarHalo]

the "Star" chick lied!

That's pretty much what I had figured, there just isn't any way to "sleep" through all that..

She should be grateful that she got such a good artist, and that he didn't even charge her that much.

 

[Monocrom]

HA!! Check this out!... the "Star" chick lied!

Ah to be young and stupid again... Well, maybe just young.

(Stupid part wasn't getting the tats. It was thinking daddy would not freak out about them).

 

[McGizmo]

So which side of her face are the stars really on?

 

[paxxus]

Anybody with just a tiny bit of decency in them would not give this 18 years old girl ("woman", give me a break, she looks 12) a full facial tattoo just like that, you just don't do that.

The decent thing to do would be to talk to her and find out if she understands what she's doing, tell her to think about it for some days, then do a few of the stars, see how it heals up, then do some more. Another idea could be to start by painting them on with some semi-permanent paint, which will eventually wear off. If you actually care a little about other people, the options are endless.

In our society, as it actually is (not as it perhaps should be, or perhaps will become), a tattoo like that will mark you out as very odd. A full facial tattoo can be compared to few other things, since it is irreversible and will profoundly affect your social life: *giggle* look there comes StarFace! Should you just merrily go ahead and do this to an 18 years old girl, I think (and hope) the answer is pretty obvious. If you just take the money and proceed to mess up her face with a radical tattoo you're just an irresponsible idiot, simple as that.

In this case, the physical appearance of the tattoo guy turned out to be a pretty good indication of his judgment.

 

[js]

And that's just it. You're talking about how it should be. I made mention of how it is.

Fair enough. But, do I take it then that you agree with me in how things should be--at least on this point?

If you're very skilled at what you do, then certainly your appearence will be overlooked in many cases. But it also depends on what line of work you're in. If it's something where you don't need to interact with the public, then a non-"clean cut" appearence won't matter to an employer. On the other hand, the Banker example is a perfect illustration of what I mean. The guy could be incredibly intelligent... But he's not getting the Banker's job that requires him to interact with the public. Namely because the public, by and large, won't deal with someone in a suit & tie and facial tattoo. They just won't. No, that's not how it should be... just the way it is. They'll go to a different bank, or perhaps ask to speak with a more "normal" Banker. (Normal in their eyes).

The public (by or large or near and small or whatever) is just people--a lot of individuals. The forest is made up of a bunch of trees. If no one stands up for how things should be, then they will never change--or at least not for the better.

Worse, if people leave forces for ill unchecked, things not only do not move in the direction they should, they move against it. Some of the contempt in this thread for those with tattoos comes to mind . . .

Anyway, the point is just that there is good reason to talk about more than just what IS. To talk also about what should be. And about the people who are making what should be into what is, what will be.

As for the young man with the long hair, keep in mind; you have skills that are in demand. He doesn't. He likely found a different job, but the Doorman position came with good pay & benefits. He could have used that good pay to go back to school and aquire some in-demand skills. But with a lesser paying job in which he doesn't have to cut his hair, he's going to have less money to better himself. It'll take him longer to save up for a higher education, shaving years off his life. In that way, his refusal to cut his hair did indeed effect his future.

The most important thing for your future is your integrity. If you sell that out--if you even just feel or think you're selling that out--you won't get much joy out of your future, no matter how financially or socially impressive it may turn out to be.

Symbols are more than just signs, information. The flag is more than a piece of cloth. Humans are more than consuming and producing animals. If your hair length means something for you, stands for something for you, it's more than just organic matter that can be dispensed with at the least inconvenience.

I would trade a future of convenience and financial success for a future of meaning any day of the week. I have done so, time and time again. And I don't regret it in the least.

 

[js]

Anybody with just a tiny bit of decency in them would not give this 18 years old girl ("woman", give me a break, she looks 12) a full facial tattoo just like that, you just don't do that.

The decent thing to do would be to talk to her and find out if she understands what she's doing, tell her to think about it for some days, then do a few of the stars, see how it heals up, then do some more. Another idea could be to start by painting them on with some semi-permanent paint, which will eventually wear off. If you actually care a little about other people, the options are endless.

In our society, as it actually is (not as it perhaps should be, or perhaps will become), a tattoo like that will mark you out as very odd. A full facial tattoo can be compared to few other things, since it is irreversible and will profoundly affect your social life: *giggle* look there comes StarFace! Should you just merrily go ahead and do this to an 18 years old girl, I think (and hope) the answer is pretty obvious. If you just take the money and proceed to mess up her face with a radical tattoo you're just an irresponsible idiot, simple as that.

In this case, the physical appearance of the tattoo guy turned out to be a pretty good indication of his judgment.

Do we know that the tattoo artist who did the stars did not do any of these things you suggest? Do we know that this 18 year old woman didn't go in over several weeks to talk with him about the star design? I haven't read anywhere about any of the events (or lack thereof) of this period.

Are you just making assumptions here, or if not, could you provide me with evidence, links, reports, etc.?

 

[McGizmo]

Do we know that the tattoo artist who did the stars did not do any of these things you suggest? Do we know that this 18 year old woman didn't go in over several weeks to talk with him about the star design? I haven't read anywhere about any of the events (or lack thereof) of this period.

Are you just making assumptions here, or if not, could you provide me with evidence, links, reports, etc.?

+1

I gave some thought initially to the number of stars since she originally said she only wanted 3. Frankly, in for a penny, in for a pound. 3 stars on her face would be just as obvious. The fact that there are more just seems to be a statement of greater conviction and certainty that "yes, I elected to have stars on my face".

Appearance and first impressions give us a clue or glimpse into a person upon which we can base a hypothesis and make educated assumptions as to what they might be like. The face value may be enough to either encourage us to try to find out more or pass on lack of interest. Tattoos may or may not serve as signals for us to try to interpret as some form of communication or insight into the person. They may be a viable filter benefiting either the viewer or the owner.

I know a couple here on Maui who are retired school teachers from New York. She is my age, 57, and I think he just turned 70. They are both reasonably active and do enjoy going to the beach. She has a couple small colored tattoos which are recent, within the last couple years. He has a small turtle tat on his ankle and just recently had a Polynesian style band tattoo done on his bicep. He states that he did this so the locals will know he is a local. I have no idea if the locals actually get this message from that tattoo or not but it does seem to at least communicate an awareness on his part as well as a favorable acceptance of a culture. I would propose that he seeks to be identified by virtue of his tattoo. Others may be seeking an identity and using tattoos as an aid. :shrug:

There is another trend that is relatively new or at least emerged during the lifetime of some of us older folks. That would be men getting their ears pierced. By now, it is rather common place. I had a friend in the bay area who had a pierced ear and I never did know what brought this about. I would guess he had his ear pierced maybe 30 - 40 years ago. He was a banker and did have to conform to a conservative dress code. I believe toward the end that I knew him, things had loosened up enough that he would wear a piercing at work but initially, when I first knew him, he didn't. I got the impression that this piercing for him was his subtle expression of revolt against the ordered society to which he needed to conform to. Putting in his stud was akin to letting his hair down.

I suspect that tattoos and other piercings and ornamental scarring will become more common place and accepted in the work place as time moves forward. I used to hire and manage people in the marine industry and my primary focus was on their knowledge and ability. At one point, I had more females working in a chandlery then males and there were some male boat owners who didn't think they could be helped by a woman. Some would insist on talking to a man. I used to enjoy asking just such a customer if he wanted me to bring in an expert to aid in his search for a solution. After an affirmative response, I would often bring in the woman who he had just tried to bypass or another female who was indeed the expert in the area of marine hardware of focus. Had there been a qualified person available to me who also sported stars on his/ her face, I would not have hesitated to hire them.

 

[js]

I loved your post, Don!

LOL! I think it's absolutely GREAT that you would bring in the woman whom the customer had just tried to bypass, precisely because she was indeed the expert in the area in question! "Do you want an expert?" "Yes" "Well, here she is". "Oh, no, I wanted a MAN . . ." hehe. Pick one or the other.

 

[McGizmo]

js,
You probably remember a sexist bumper sticker from years back:

"The best man for the job is a woman"

Well like so many stereotypes, there is a basis often times. I don't want to open the door to any other racist or sexist or any other filters for prejudgment here but we all know of these filters and indeed use some of them at least on an initial viewing. Tattoos seem to fit into just such a filter "kit".

I don't know about you guys but I always enjoy a "sleeper" and someone or something that is not at all what one might initially assume. They make life interesting and help keep one alert!

 

[Monocrom]

Fair enough. But, do I take it then that you agree with me in how things should be--at least on this point?

Yes, I agree with you that folks shouldn't be judged so quickly on appearance alone. But it happens so often that perhaps it is something ingrained into our DNA. Perhaps on a primal level. What's the first thing that attracts a guy to a woman (and vice-versa).... appearance. "Lookism" could very well be a deeply ingrained issue.

The most important thing for your future is your integrity. If you sell that out--if you even just feel or think you're selling that out--you won't get much joy out of your future, no matter how financially or socially impressive it may turn out to be.

Symbols are more than just signs, information. The flag is more than a piece of cloth. Humans are more than consuming and producing animals. If your hair length means something for you, stands for something for you, it's more than just organic matter that can be dispensed with at the least inconvenience.

I would trade a future of convenience and financial success for a future of meaning any day of the week. I have done so, time and time again. And I don't regret it in the least.

I agree with you about the importance of one's integrity. But to be honest, I have a difficult time seeing integrity from the point of view of hair. The Flag is certainly a symbol that many Americans rally around. (And not just war veterans). Connecting the Flag to one's integrity is much easier than connecting hair to integrity. I actually see your point, but would argue that many people would not. Many folks would understand if a young man turned down a high-paying job if one of the requirements was to burn the American Flag. But if the job was turned down due to needing to get a haircut, it would be seen as a silly; perhaps even foolish refusal.

It would be interesting to see if that particular young man would cut his hair, if a hot girl said she goes wild for short-haired guys.

 

[NA8]

Reminds me of San Diego. An electronics professor once told our class that techs in SD worked six months and collected unemployment the other six months. Shocking. However, I eventually got with the program. I recall sitting in job interviews with my beard saying, Oh yeah, hobbies ? I LOVE guns. Oh, you'll call me back with a time for the next interview ? Great !!!

 

[Fallingwater]

Don't much care about them on others, and certainly don't want them on myself.
On a side note, it's amazing to see what people will do to themselves. I refer to things like Hayden Panettiere who likes to "vivere senza rimipianti", which is funny as hell to me because, as an Italian, I immediately recognize the mistake in that sentence (the extra "i" shouldn't be there).
Or to any of these...

 

[LowBat]

Or to any of these...

Hey I used to have this exact same chair an ottoman. :laughing:

 

[js]

Yes, I agree with you that folks shouldn't be judged so quickly on appearance alone. But it happens so often that perhaps it is something ingrained into our DNA. Perhaps on a primal level. What's the first thing that attracts a guy to a woman (and vice-versa).... appearance. "Lookism" could very well be a deeply ingrained issue.

There is certainly such a thing as a "first impression" and a person you find physically attractive definitely is a factor in a first impression. And if you find tattoos disgusting, that too will be a factor. Or if you LOVE tattoos, same thing only opposite. But, while a first impression may well be beyond your mental control, a judgment is not. And, while I am all about intuitions and gut feelings and hunches, and do myself rely on them when making decisions where time is a factor, I still think it's very important not to turn such things into a guiding principle, or sweeping generalization.

Which, for the record, I would not accuse you of having done here in this thread.

I agree with you about the importance of one's integrity. But to be honest, I have a difficult time seeing integrity from the point of view of hair. The Flag is certainly a symbol that many Americans rally around. (And not just war veterans). Connecting the Flag to one's integrity is much easier than connecting hair to integrity. I actually see your point, but would argue that many people would not. Many folks would understand if a young man turned down a high-paying job if one of the requirements was to burn the American Flag. But if the job was turned down due to needing to get a haircut, it would be seen as a silly; perhaps even foolish refusal.

It would be interesting to see if that particular young man would cut his hair, if a hot girl said she goes wild for short-haired guys.

It all depends on the person, the context, the situation. I don't think you can objectively say that ANYTHING is "silly" when it comes to integrity. What is important is whether or not it is *really* a core issue of integrity for the person, or if it is maybe just a pose, just a passing phase that doesn't really burn brightly at the core of who they are. Perhaps this young man who wouldn't cut his hair was being silly, and it was just a matter of him not really caring about much of anything, --job, hair, future, whatever--, and that if he DID care, such as for a woman, that the real truth would come out: the hair length had nothing to do with his integrity.

Or perhaps not. Probably only that young man himself knows for sure.

A lot of people have staked a great deal on things that an outsider might see as "silly", but which were truly of great importance and moment for them.

You don't have to go back far in time to reach a point where almost all people would find the modern's relation with his four-footed family members (some call them "pets") to be silly, stupid, maudlin, sentimental, and somewhat insane. They wouldn't understand why it was a big deal for people getting on busses out of New Orleans in-the-path-of-Katrina to just leave their cats and dogs and other animals. Who cares? It's "just" a cat, right? It's "just" a dog, right?

I wouldn't have left my cats for anything in the world. I wouldn't have gotten on that bus. I simply wouldn't have been able to live with it. They would have had to tie me up and and bodily carry me off kicking and screaming.

And there have been times in my life when I wouldn't have been able to live with cutting my hair for a job, either. For my lover . . . well, that's a different story. I would have cut my hair (or have grown it out) for any woman I was in love with.

Integrity is in the (minds) eye of the person him or herself, not the beholder.

 

[js]

Been noticing a lot of people with tattoos lately, mostly due to this thread and thinking about the subject. Tonight at dinner one of the servers had these two absolutely gorgeous flower tattoos on her arms, just above her elbows. Tattoos are quite common here, and from my own experience and suspicions, the people who have tattoos seem to me to be much more interesting and attractive/charismatic people than those without. If I had to pick one camp, I'd be in the tattoo camp. Of course, one doesn't need to do any such thing, and can take individuals as individuals and not feel the need to stereotype them based on whether they have tattoos or not. But, in any case, there it is. I like tattoos, generally, and I seem to tend to like people with tattoos. Just my informal personal experience, of course! YMMV.

 

[js]

Greta, or anyone else with some tattoo knowledge:

What do you think of L.A. Ink, or Miami Ink, or Inked, or similar shows about tattoos / tattoo parlours?

 

[Greta]

I've never watched them so I really can't give an opinion one way or another. :shrug: Sorry...