Search results

I know a bloke who only has one and he's an artist. He likes the art form but not so much a fan of the pain involved with getting them.

I have a decent job, I've been in it for 9 years and I am at least 15% tattoo.

But that doctor would have gone through the same rigorous training as a doctor without a tattoo. You're right, it is entirely superficial and it's good to know I'm not like that.

I'm in the midst of my professional career and have had zero problems with my tattoos.

Absolutely. One is making a judgement call based on a personal choice to sport tattoos and the other is downright racism.

It's an admirable way of handling it :thumbsup:

Entirely fair. But someone who works with children should still be judged on their work and not their appearance, with the below exceptions taken into account!

Not to be picky but :"Unless you work with children" does not tally up with "As an employee you should be judged on the quality of your work not on how you look."

Yes, let's just continue letting bigots be bigots. Let's not challenge their views in an attempt at change. For what it's worth, I don't class people against tattoos as bigoted. It is very much a personal choice.

Ditto! I find myself wondering though whether anyone else in the meeting is inked and they've covered it up!

I personally have most of my arms covered. I have them to neither look 'cool' or to be 'different'. I have them because I wanted them. If I was offered a job on the proviso that I cover myself up I'd tell them to shove it; why would I want to work for people who have judged me on my appearance...