How does /pol/ feel about tattoos? I'm 28 and I have thought getting one for the last ten years but couldn't think of what i wanted.
in b4 insecure losers, degenerates, faggots,...
>>72633209
They are degenerate
Also
>tattooed people are just as qualified and responsible as you
It's almost as if your choices have consequences
>>72633209
I want to get a cross on the back of my neck, but I think that full body/large tattoos are pretty garish.
pointless wastes
no reason to exist expect for giving you the ability to quickly discovering if someone is dumb trash or not
>>72633209
There's a difference between getting a tatto of something meaningful to you on, say, your shoulder, and getting a ghetto spiderweb face tattoo or some faggot sleeve.
>>72633467
Inb4 someone reminding me it's
>inb4
>not in b4
>>72633209
How about that?
Have you been paid to kill people by your government? Then you can go ahead and get a tattoo related to your service.
Otherwise no, and fix your fucking hair.
The only acceptable tattoo
>>72633209
I wouldn't want a permanent reminder of a temporary feeling from 3 years ago.
>>72633209
It might affect your ability to get a job in the work industry.
Tattoos are a degenerate millenial fad. Sure, sailors and bikers and the like have had tattoos for ages, and those kinds will still get them. However, popularity of tattoos for the bluepilled mainstream will die off soon. Think how all these morons are going to look in 40 or 50 years, when nobody gets them any more.
>>72633467
they are losers, degenerates and faggots.
I have 3 tattoos, 2 relating to service and one relating to where I'm from.
I don't think tattoos are degenerate, you just have to think about placement, don't get a tattoo on your neck if you want a respectable job, but I think tattoos covered by a t-shirt and long pants are fine.
>>72634575
you proved his point haha
>>72633209
I have one on each arm, hidden so I could get a real job. I barley even notice them cause i usually wear a hoodie. I don't regret getting them but im not as happy as i used to be with myself about them. There was a point in time i almost got a sleeve, top keks on that.
I've always thought it would be pretty funny to have someone draw me up an accurate Tinkerbell in a nude pose for lulz.
But I wouldn't actually do it.
>>72633209
It's a permanent reminder of a temporary feeling. Tattoos are a physical mark of your own impulsiveness.
>>72634249
Hi, Common Filth, good to see you
>>72633209
Why dont people respect an employers right to not hire you because they think their customers will dislike them and not want to shop anymore, are we just supposed to make all employers hire you because you got fucking barbed wire on your face
>>72634249
This. If it's that important to me that I require a daily reminder of my thoughts/beliefs then I'll just write it down and tack it to the wall.
>>72633209
People with tattoos are bigger attention whores than tripfags
>>72635770
And in the cases that they aren't, you'll just assume so anyway?
That's stupid.
Guy A is a top tier qualified person who can not only do the job, but is one of the best at it. He has tattoos and 2 mild ear piercings but absolutely none of that can take away from the objective genius of his work. He will make your products better than anyone else, and is an over all cool guy.
Guy B is barely qualified for the job, got his degree from what seems like pure luck, will likely get the job done in a half assed manner, the dude is likely depressed and has tons of issues at home BUT he looks spiffy and has no mark on his skin so he gets hired and Guy A doesn't.
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard and I hope the companies who hire Guy B for the sake of the IMAGE of success over actual tangible progress, goes under. And the same to go to any of you who think the same.
When it comes to a job/career that does not have to do with communication and working with others (in which case, making good impressions can make or break things), the man's fucking work should be what matters over anything else. Who the fuck cares about how wild he was in college if he can build you the best damn engine you can get, if he can create medicine that will save lives. His genius is what you're paying for, now his fucking image you stupid pansies.
Caring about some shit like that is women tier logic.
If you want one, get one. Don't get angry or frustrated when someone won't hire you if you have it on a part of your body that will be exposed to the general public.
Really, tattoos in parts of your body that are generally covered up are fine and employers usually won't care, but in visible places, don't expect to be getting any front end jobs.
I just don't see the point behind tats anyway.
If you can't remember something what makes you think sticking it on your skin so you will remember it, forever, is a good idea? That's the logic I see every time someone says "Because it means something to me", if it means something to you enjoy the fucking memory, dipshit. Don't put poison in your skin.
>>72636267
because we live in a time where people want the government to eliminate everything they don't like without even a hint of irony.
>>72633209
Mark of the degenerate.
>>72637873
Your long-ass reply just goes to show how pro-tattoo people invest themselves heavily into stupid, meaningless bullshit on a whim.
>responsible
no. i bet they smoke too
>>72638448
I don't have any tattoos. I'm just trying to understand the logic of not hiring someone with a tattoo despite his qualifications.
When its a job where image counts, talking to people and making impressions is kind of the center of everything. Then yes I fully understand that. You gotta sell the image.
But when it's for something that doesn't involve any of that emotional manipulation bullshit. Like making hardware/software, medicine, engineering whatever the case is. Your fucking genius is what matters. It's his work that will make me money not his god damn face.
Ill hire the tattooed genius over the clean looking idiot ANY day.
Sounds like most of you morons would choose otherwise because "muh degeneracy" and will then wonder why you keep losing to your competitor when your competitor is a "degenerate" who hires hipster looking scientists.
>>72633209
>drawing meaningless symbols, and empty qoutes on your body
>"responsible"
enjoy the working at the loading dock when you're 55 fggt
>>72638773
>implying pro-tattoo enablers must have tattoos
There you go again being impulsive and sending big replies on a whim. Keep proving me right.
>>72633209
Degenerate. When I applied for my job here in Korea, I put "no tattoos or piercings" on my resume, just because I knew they'd appreciate it and because it felt great to put down degenerates in a manner that would probably be illegal in the cucked West. My friend said he had no tattoos on his application (Tattoos were not disqualifying, but a yes/no question on application, apart from a resume which was totally open-ended), and he is scared of his employer seeing his tattoos now. He got visibly butt-hurt when I told him what I put on my resume and why, lol. So many people regret their tattoos too, lol. Lol, degenerate scum.
>>72638773
News flash dipshit. You ALWAYS gotta sell that image. Just because you're working IT does not mean you have nobody to answer to, or there are not people you're going to have to impress in person as part of your job. Its not just fucking about you, either, its about the group cohesion, probably the single most important trait a team can have in order to be productive and proactive, and you being a tattooed mess fucks with that cohesion.
>>72638773
>tattooed genius
oxymoron
>work at gym
>some 20-30 year olds are tatted up from the neck down
>you can tell by looking at them that they just did it to get pussy, as their tats are retarded shit, like double dragons and poorly drawn faces
>tfw you know you're chunky and not buff but you use tattoos to try to make you look buffer and sexier.
>older people come in and you can see their faded and stretched tattoos that look like they are growing ugly tumors on their skin.
I got nothing against it, but make sure you're doing it for you and for good reasons. Tattoo you name / allergies, images that remind you of who you want to be ect...
Not
>hurrr I got a double dragon because it reminds me that I need to be careful because I am nice but I have a bad side too!! So you better watch out!! XD
Just don't look like a fucking mess
>>72638773
tattoos are a sign of bad decision making.
Buying something that has no real value in any way, cannot be sold, and is permanent for several hundred dollars is a bad decision.
>>72633209
Tattoos on women indicate they're trash. Tattoos on men as long as they're meaningful indications of service or accomplishment and are covered by a standard T-shirt are okay.
Women don't do anything or accomplish shit worth getting a tattoo about, so anything they get indicates they're a worthless retarded whore no matter where they place it.
>>72639101
Yet you refute nothing. So you'll be ignored
>>72639128
Ok a fair point but how does that, in the end, compare to the actual product.
If 2 guys are trying to design an engine, and tattoo guy makes the better engine, you're telling me you'll still hire non tattoo guy to make his inferior engine JUST because of some stupid concept that tattoos must imply something negative about the individual and his life choices.
Most of you try to justify it by saying he should have known it would fuck with him getting a job, and there in itself is his lack of responsibility. But the only reason he would have to worry about that is because of people like you, who are creating said problem out of pure stigma.
Absolutely nothing tangible or scientific, just the concept, the IDEA that someone who has a visible tattoo must be irresponsible.
And keep in mind I'm obviously not talking about the guy who has a full body tattoo or a huge "THUG LIFE" on his neck.
I can absolutely guarantee that making a product that works and is wanted/needed goes over any of the semantics of how the actual workers look or even behave like.
>>72639919
Bad decision only because of the stigma created by people like you. It's only a bad decision if he regrets it/doesn't like it anymore. If he wanted to get said tattoo and continues to be content with that choice then it is by no means a bad decision. It can't be considered a bad decision simply due to social standards. Because if that's the case, whenever you didn't conform in your life and decided to be yourself, you were making a "bad decision" simply because what you did was not favorable to a certain public.
If getting a tattoo has a physical repercussion, you would be correct. But to me, smoking cigarettes, something that is objectively bad for you in many many ways, is a sign of bad decision making. Yet no one ever gets belittled for needing a smoke break to satisfy their cancerous addiction.
>>72640319
Hell, most of you have bosses who would fire you if they found out you even browsed 4chan, and specifically /pol/ of all places.
You're telling me that, despite how hard and honest your work is, how dedicated you are and how responsible in life you are. That your boss would be justified in firing you because you happen to enjoy browsing a website that is associated with all sorts of bigotry and foulness. The same prejudice and logic that you would use to discriminate against someone with tats. Even if you weren't even one of the bigots, all you did was browse for funny pictures, you're still associated and you'll sit there saying "gee, i guess it's my fault for browsing 4chan even though I am not any of the things my boss is associating me with, I should have been more responsible".
What kind of cuck fucking mentality is that, why the hell are you all bending over backwards for your supreme employer overlords.
>>72633467
But they are
Get some tribal tatts
The tattoo is the poor man's investment in art.
If you can cover them up. Who the fuck cares?
Getting them on your hands, neck or face makes you a fucking retard.
>>72633209
A lot of my male family members have them so I'm biased but I have no problem with them, they all have their master's and high paying jobs. A lot of people just get them for the aesthetic nowadays, for better or worse they've been gentrified. There are shitty people with tattoos but that's not really everyone. I think that awful people get tattoos but not all people with tattoos are awful
>>72633209
>28
>still considering a tattoo
If you are past the age of 16 and think tattoos are cool, you need to kill yourself.
>spending money on a completely worthless and permanent marring of one's skin
>not an indication of poor decision making ability
>>72634100
How do I into muscular skinhead mode?
>>72640319
>how does that, in the end, compare to the actual product.
You have no appreciation for possibility. While your contribution might be par, your inclusion destroys group cohesion. What you make might be good, if you're skilled enough to offset your terrible handicap, but ultimately, it will take more effort from the group to produce a similarly qualified product due to the fact that your marked up body was a general distraction that destroyed group cohesion.
>solutely nothing tangible or scientific, just the concept, the IDEA that someone who has a visible tattoo must be irresponsible.
Because it shows that you're not motivated to certain walks of life, meaning you don't value the company and progress within that company as much as another applicant might.
>Bad decision only because of the stigma created by people like you
It is your decision to get a tattoo, and you actively chose to put it somewhere your employer might see. Live with your choices you bawling shitty baby.
>>72633209
You are branding yourself as an unimaginative degenerate who follows the herd.
Trying to stand out by marking up your skin is no different than the cumdumpster slut with purple hair. The only way people will respect you is by getting in their head, and there is no tattoo original enough to do that.
They work to fuck shallow whores though, but in that case you might as well just fuck an actual whore off BP or somewhere, since any woman you "pull" for being a tattooed twat will surely fuck another guy with a different tat in ten minutes, and also likely has a history that contains a "coon fucking phase" which is hidden in her phone albums under a folder called "exploring chocolate."
>>72633209
As long as it can be hidden in professional clothing, I'd say it's not a problem. Or to phrase it another way, if your boss knows you have a tattoo, you have a problem.
Why the fuck does this always happen??
>Degenerates discover something
>Rest of society warns it is degenerate and will lead to serious problems later in life
>It leads to serious problems later in life
>Degenerates scream that the system is broken, must be changed, and that they themselves are victims
>The system changes to allow degenerates to keep doing said thing without consequences
>Degenerates discover new thing and the cycle repeats
Why? What the fuck?
>>72640692
4chan doesn't show on your fucking face. You destroyed your natural, human camouflage, which shows you're a fucking dumbass. I don't even care about the contents of your tats, that alone makes me see you as a shitty, stupid, impulsive punk who finds "cool things" more important than his well being.
>>72633692
No there isn't.
>>72642143
Because we don't kill them, like we should be.
Don't get it any place that can be seen in a business casual outfit.
Nothing below the elbows, nothing above the shoulders. Don't say I didn't warn you.
>>72633692
There's not much point in that either.
Why don't you carry around a piece of paper with your stupid quote on it instead.
I mean.. yes, yes goyim get tattoos. They're very cool
>responsible
Tattooed people.
Making brilliant, long term decisions every day!
>>72641863
Squat/bench/deadlift/chins + tattoo.
>>72642178
There are exceptions. If you were in the armed forces, you get to have a tattoo associated with your company and what branch you were a part of. That's a completely different animal altogether, and a general public service. It's effectively a "do not fuck with" sign, and if I was an employer, that would be my exception to the tat rule. If you served and were honorably discharged, I would be happy to work with you.
>>72636267
This. Employers have the right to hire who they please. That being said, if someone has tatoos covered easily and not garish/infammatory i think thats fine. However, people need to remember that thier actions have consequences when considering tatoo size, placement, and contents.
>>72642512
Nope. You have to respect their "life choices" :P
>How does /pol/ feel about tattoos?
The Buddha never got tattoos. His mind was perfectly self-content. The notion of ever getting a tattoo had absolutely nothing to offer him. He already had it all. Ergo, the coolest tattoo is no tattoo.
>>72642594
Ill respect it as long as thier life choices dont look like>>72642388
Like i have aircrew wings tatooed on my chest. No one will ever know unless i take off my shirt for some reason
>>72641913
>You have no appreciation for possibility. .......... your marked up body was a general distraction that destroyed group cohesion.
I simply refuse to believe this is true. If a tattoo is a general distraction that destroys group cohesion, then so is having a giant hairy mole (which is biological and out of your control) on your face, or a skin disease that has a very visible effect like Vitiligo. By that logic, giant hairy mole guy and vitiligo girl are also too big of liabilities to hire because their strange deformity is very apparent an a distraction.
The only reason a tattoo would destroy group cohesion is if the group is following the same logic of stigma. In which case, they are the very source of said problem, if they could get the hell over themselves, they will acknowledge a person has a tattoo for a second and then move on to what they are there to do. and that, i guarantee you, is what almost every fucking body does. It has to be an EXTREME case (like tattoos on your face) for it to be such a disruptive force.
>>72641913
>Because it shows that you're not motivated to certain walks of life
But that's not a valid argument if the only reason it "implies" that is because of the people who are against it, spreading that ideology. Like I said, if someone made a concious and informed decision to get a tattoo and is continuously contempt with that decision, then how in the hell was he irresponsible. The only repercussion to getting a tattoo is social crap, which changes over time anyway, only further proving how not concrete the concept it. All this is, is an emotional attachment to an idea. The same way liberals would never admit to blacks having lower intelligence on average, because of their emotional attachment to the IDEA and CONCEPT of equality. Also why Jamal gets hired over hard working white guy (affirmative action). You have to be a hypocrite to deny this.
>>72642171
Already stated I'm not talking about the extreme cases like face tats.
>>72640319
>"tattoos and tattoo enablers are impulsive"
>try to prove me wrong by impulsively sending autistically long replies
>proving me right over and over
>proving me right now
>>72642853
your entire argument is basically
>they don't think it be like it is but it do
You don't WANT there to be a stigma, you don't think the stigma is justified, but it's a self fulfilling one. ie. society believes tattoos indicate someone is dumb, ergo if someone gets one, then society is going to think they're dumb for doing that.
![UglyGirl[1].jpg~original.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/UBbMcq6.jpg "UglyGirl[1].jpg~original.jpg")
>>72636267
What if this chick wanted to work at Hooters?
>>72633209
Take 2 minutes to think about why the OPs image exists. It's because right or wrong, there is a bias people hold against people with tattoos, and those who are tattooed want to dispel this bias because it harms them.
Like it or not getting one will only ever lower your chances at being employed and finding a partner, it will never increase those chances.
There's also a lot of science that corrlates number of tattoos with things like increased cheating, increased risk of STDs and a number of other degenerate things.
I hire in my work place as a Director and I'd never hire someone with a tattoo to represent the company or work in an important decision making position, i'd expect people without tattoos to be making better and more rational decisions.
>>72633209
>>72633469
Yeah growing up we got told "don't get tattoos because employers don't like it" and similar notions right? Some of us listened and took that seriously, and Tattoo Bro over here says "fuck it" and does it anyway and then demand the positive treatment they knew they weren't going to get. It feels like... someone cutting in line /pol/. Like fuck us responsible people who actually listened.
The tattoo represents a lack of long-term thinking too. Every single person I know with one pretty much did it spontaneously. Like they never think "do I want to be an old man with Byran Griffin from Family Guy tattooed on my chest?" Nope. Long term doesn't come into these people's brains at all. So from a hiring perspective I see it as risky, why hire Mr/Mrs Spontaneous Short Term Bad Decision Maker?
>>72642617
You know I actually feel like this. I like knowing my skin is all mine and there is noone elses symbols or marks on it.
>>72643108
>You don't WANT there to be a stigma, you don't think the stigma is justified, but it's a self fulfilling one. ie. society believes tattoos indicate someone is dumb, ergo if someone gets one, then society is going to think they're dumb for doing that.
Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. That logic is never a good reason to justify ANYTHING at all. And anon, the worst part about such a thing is that things like stigma are ARBITRARY and change on a whim with the times my friend.
Many of the principles you hold dear today can or will be stigma in the future, because you keep perpetuating this logic.
It's purely a social thing which changes so often it's stupid to try and ever hold onto a principle that has to do with sociology. Tomorrow it'll be weird NOT to have a fucking tattoo. The same stigma will be applied in reverse as it's happened countless times for other subjects, like homosexuality and the like. But thank you anon, all i pretty much wanted was to see if someone was at least willing to admit that, that is the core of the argument here. Which is not a good reason for anything ever.
>>72636267
My mother works in Nursing homes and interviews applicant workers and dances around this issue all the time.
As if poor old slightly confused grandma or grandpa wants to wake up in the middle of the night to someone covered in tattoos or riddled with facial piercings.
>>72642853
>then so is having a giant hairy mole
So if someone is absolutely revolting to look at, that's not a factor when thinking about if you should, or should not hire them? And don't be fooled, the way people look impacts social cohesion to a great effect. If I could help it, I most certainly wouldn't hire someone with your stupid, hypothetical, hairy mole.
However, your comparison breaks apart even before I get there, really. A tattoo is a personal choice, and it means much more than a mole does. People don't CHOOSE to have moles. Choosing to fuck up your human complexion is different than being cursed with one already so.
>The only reason a tattoo would destroy group cohesion is if the group is following the same logic of stigma
or
>Why won't you fucking faggots accept that I'm going to tat my body and there's nothing you can do about it? G'ALL!
Nobody wants to look at that shit. If you want to paint your personality onto your body, and then have people look at it, become self employed. Other people find it disgusting, and your response it to just scoff at everyone else's metric of beauty (or in this case, object, and disgusting freakdom), and then to stamp your feet, yelling, screaming, PLEADING that sticking ink under your skin is normal and acceptable. Fuck off. I'm sure you're so marked up, you look like a heroin addict.
>>72633209
Not really a fan. Occasionally I'll find one that looks cool, but then I consider the fact that it's permanently on that person's body, which is just dumb.
If it's somewhere you can hide it easily, then, you know, fine. If it's on your arm, wrist, neck, or (God forbid) face, then you're screwing yourself for no reason.
>>72638773
I want to work with ppl I can relate to, not filthy degenerates.
I like tatoos. They're useful. They are a red flag automatically warning me that I'm not going to like a person before I even have to waste time talking to them.
>>72643723
>The same stigma will be applied in reverse as it's happened countless times for other subjects, like homosexuality and the like.
Not really. Western societies stigmas have been pretty consistent for hundreds of years.
>>72633209
I work with a guy who has tattoos and he's a fucking hipster as well. Wears those kind of pants that don't fit quite right, has all the snooty hispter mannerisms about him, and is dumb as fuck to boot.
Tattoos are great because they let me know which people are completely devoid of any intelligence.
Tattoos which are used as a rite of passage in some places are exempt from this as they are not something done because it looks cool but because there is some inherent meaning and tradition behind it.
lol... all the rebellious hipster millenials who got tatted up their first couple years of liberal arts school are turning 27 now and need a job and healthcare.
>>72644549
>Tattoos which are used as a rite of passage
The only places where I think this still happens is rural Africa. I can't think of any other place that still does traditional rite of passage tattoos.
>>72643966
>So if someone is absolutely revolting to look at, that's not a factor when thinking about if you should, or should not hire them?
I'll be fair and say that it would be stupid to not believe people don't get hired sometimes because they're butt ugly. I get that, but it does not make it right especially in the case where the job has little to nothing to do with image and everything to do with how hard working a person is, and how good their product is.
>nd don't be fooled, the way people look impacts social cohesion to a great effect.
I don't disagree that it happens and that it has this effect, but i will not agree that it's right unless your work depends on an image and impression. In which case, the boss is free to decide what that image should look like, and if that image is only with beautiful people, more power to him.
>A tattoo is a personal choice, and it means much more than a mole does.
You said it was a distraction, so i argued another distraction. Now you're back to the stigma and principle of the action. Which is what I was acknowledging only exists because it's perpetuated in this manner. No actual justification, just concept. So i already addressed this notion. If it was genuinely because it was a visual distraction and a boss does not want his employees distracted, then skin disease or mole guy still don't get hired. In which case there would at least be some consistency in the logic.
>Nobody wants to look at that shit. bla bla bla
well now you're just angry and you went and assumed a bunch of things I never thought or said. I already made clear i have no tattoo, no intention of getting one because i have no reason to at the moment. I also never said it's normal or acceptable, my argument is that it should be IRRELEVANT when the job is about the work/product and only is relevant because of stigma. I'm also gonna make clear AGAIN that I'm not talking about the EXTREME cases (like facial tattoos or full body shit)
>>72644340
You have not been paying attention at all then.
You'll get fired for having anti lgbt ideals nowadays m8. I wish i could be exaggerating to try and make a point but there's threads about this shit daily nigga, pay attention. Stigma is most certainly reversing and not for the better.
>>72643966
Its a shame because you were the only one giving actual arguments instead of emotional crap and then you went and shat yourself in your last paragraph.
>>72644812
The reason I used the "rite of passage" is because I worked with a guy from some African country and he had these tribal tattoos.
Guy hated American niggers with a vengeance. In fact, EVERY African I ever met always clled them niggers.
They're a bad idea
There isn't much justification for them other than "muh self expression" and they have long-lasting consequences, both in the way people perceive you and employment opportunities.
Why the fuck would you get a tattoo?
>>72633209
Except they're not, they made a rash decision to permanently mark themselves with something petty.
No matter how important it was to them, it's petty to everyone else and if you had to mark your body to remember it then it must not have been very important.
People with tattoos tend to have a very low self-worth.
>>72633209
My boss has tattoos and is a complete degenerate.
>got all of them while drunk
>functioning alcoholic
>you get the picture
Now he's all upset I won't brainstorm ideas with him.
God I can't wait to put in my two weeks here soon and watch him go in panic mode because he's been stealing my ideas and passing them to the top as his own.
Piece of snit and he tries to act all tough when he literally built a driveway through a DOT sidewalk with no permits.
>motherfucker is going to pay me next years salary without me being there.
BAHAHAHAHA
>>72644892
You made a decision to ink your body without any forethought, I'll make the decision not to hire you because of it.
You then double down on your poor decision by screaming "DESCRIMINATION REEE"
>>72645836
That is not what i am arguing at all. It seems like most of you lack reading comprehension.
>>72633209
Pic related is false. Tattoos signal narcissism, poor judgement, lack of character and conformity to degenerate fashion trends. Ironically, in trying to show how unique you are, you accomplish the opposite.
I don't have a problem with getting a tattoo for a major life event, as long as it's in line with said event and not overdone or gaudy, but I find superfluous tattoos that people get "just because" to be distasteful for the most part.
>>72644892
>I get that, but it does not make it right
It does, because you see, as an employer, I am responsible for maintaining group cohesion and general focus on my team. If one of the persons has downs, its going to completely morph that fragile dynamic, and that dynamic is the edge and livelihood of everyone working there. It's the difference between coming to work pissed off because you feel alienated and weird at work, and going there pumped.
>i will not agree that it's right unless your work depends on an image and impression
All work depends on personal image. I don't care if you're coding HTML, shoveling coal, or sucking dick. ALL work depends on image, because ALL work requires you to report to a boss, or work with other human beings at some point. This magical occupation you have that doesn't ever have to present itself to anyone doesn't exist.
>You said it was a distraction, so i argued another distraction
A Moley Morty and Tattoo'd Tammy are both ugly as sin, but at least Morty didn't bin his looks. Nobody is going to look at my ugly Morty and see someone who is intrinsically irresponsible.
>my argument is that it should be IRRELEVANT
And part of that product is human relations that don't include doodles on the body. What you look like is always relevant, contrary to what the posters in the study hall say. It influences responses in a number of nuanced ways, that as an employer, I would have to be aware of that. You might not like that tattoos are associated with people that have them (I know, shocker), and are generally shunned, but that's how it is. The fact that you got one anyway does speak volumes about you before you even say a word, and I'm taking that into account for you first impression on me, and everyone else you meet after I hire you, and how THAT reflects on me as well.
>But I'm responsible p-promise! My tattoos don't define me
I don't care what you say. What if you were 3 months preg? Should I just be understanding?
You guys sound like a bunch of yuppie betas. Tattoos are the only thing that cant be taken away from you.
>>72646440
You'll remember that event without ink.
In a moment of weakness they'll get that tattoo, I get that.
>>72647059
Your skin can't be either or your eye colour.
Don't be fucking retarded anon.
>>72647321
Irrelevant, it's a company image thing. You don't hear people with tattoos they can hide having any issues.
>>72646708
>It does, because you see, as an employer, I am responsible for maintaining group cohesion and general focus on my team.
That is very true. That is why if tattoo guy is too much a distraction to hire (and im not even talking about FACE tattoo level stuff here) then so is hairy mole guy, or vitiligo girl. If you're saying you're consistent in this logic then I have to agree with you.
But in reality, that is not the case.
>All work depends on personal image. I don't care if you're coding HTML, shoveling coal, or sucking dick. ALL work depends on image, because ALL work requires you to report to a boss
The boss is not who you are selling the image to. I'm saying if all you're doing is coding some HTML and you're damn good and dedicated to it, you work etiquette is by no means bad, then your boss shouldn't care about your fucking apparent tattoo of a shark on your forearm. And I'm saying the only reason he does is due to stigma, other wise even he couldn't have given a shit, all he wants is his god damn job done and done right. If your boss needed you to go and communicate with other companies or customers, then yes, i fully understand why he would only send the spiffiest looking fucker to do it.
>intrinsically irresponsible.
This right is here is the problem, the idea that someone who got a tattoo is automatically irresponsible. why? Because he did not care or acknowledge the stigma he would get for it? Because that is the literal only repercussion, and that stigma only exists because it is perpetuated and absolutely nothing more. 0 actual grounding in reality. Anyone, responsible and hard working, irresponsible and lazy, can get a tattoo. You're out of your mind and jumping the damn shark for that to be the only conclusion to getting a tattoo. That is some serious prejudice.
(continued)
>>72633209
Small tattoos are fine
If you have your entire arm/back/any on your face, i know you aren't a respectable person
>>72646708
>>72648044
>the fact that you got one anyway does speak volumes about you before you even say a word,
See this i understand. It is WHAT it's speaking about the person that i disagree with. The only having a tattoo is associated with "degeneracy" is because you've been told to believe and view people with tattoos as such. That's what I mean by perpetuated, its like a self fulfilling prophecy.
as this anon stated.
>>72643108
>>72646708
>I don't care what you say. What if you were 3 months preg? Should I just be understanding?
That's not the same thing at all. A woman that is 3 months pregnant will most definitely be unstable at work, and then constantly need to not be at work. You can't even compare those 2. Because a pregnant woman will go through what a pregnant woman goes through, where as with someone with a tat, you're just assuming and implying that he MIGHT be a lazy prick or have been irresponsible. An implication you only hold because you've been told to believe that about those people. He could show you how dead wrong you were in the work place.
Your only valid argument is about the tattoo being a distraction. Which is so arbitrary and variable and likely exaggerated up the ass in your head that it seems like your grasping at straws here, to find any reason possible to discriminate against someone who has a tattoo which you believe is degenerate.
Reasoning like this is why there are laws to protect people in the workplace, laws that end up backfiring and fucking people over because they were forced to hire scum under that same protection. "Protection" that wouldn't have had to happen if people didn't mindlessly hold and perpetuate prejudice.
(continued)
>>72649313
The reason why you're obligated to hire Jamal is because before, when good hard working and honest Jamals walked in to try and apply you denied them because you just assumed he's a nigger no different from the violent ones we see everyday. Stigma.
Now because of that stigma, which has reversed (and now its stigma to believe negative things about niggers) you have to hire a fucking retard to not seem racist. Had you from the very beginning, not used such ungrounded and emotional logic to hire your employees, you would have found out about those honest hard working Jamals way earlier, and had never had to go through this shit. Hell, you might have found that there was no one better to hire, than Jamal or white guy with a tattoo.
>>72633209
pathetic and a way of broadcasting to the world that your parents didnt pay attention to you
>>72633209
>most businesses look down on hiring people with tattoos for anything higher than serving coffee at Starbucks
>get a fly tattoo on your hands anyway
>complain
They can fuck right off.
>>72638773
False dichotomy m8. In reality, the choice is between some guy who can't understand consequences and someone who can. As a guy who has a team of about 20 people, there has never been a situation where I only have two candidates. It is more like 40 candidates all with relatively similar experience and I get to discriminate on things like having poor judgement without sacrificing in other areas.
What does it make me if my father was a tattoo artist?
I only got a meat tag
>>72650363
Nothing wrong with being paid to give dumb tattoos to people.
>>72633209
I am 31. I really wanted one in my early-mid 20's, but now that I am older, I am so fucking thankful not to have one. Especially as I live in NYC/Brooklyn where everyone and their mom as a tattoo, not having one sets me apart from eveyone else, and in a good way.
