- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/6/12 at 12:35 pm to jembeurt
Like I said, I'm only talking about visible tattoos which mean face and neck and hands. Other tattoos are fine and I realize every athlete has a few. But for a high school kid to have them is a little different than a millionaire athlete who has nothing better to spend his money on. If a 17 year old kid is getting several neck tattoos, it shows he clearly isn't a financial genius and probably makes bad decisions. To dispute this is dumb.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 12:43 pm to Chazz Reinhold
quote:
If a 17 year old kid is getting several neck tattoos, it shows he clearly isn't a financial genius
This is where I would begin to disagree with you. Going where you are going is stretching it a little bit. Many different factors is that line of thinking. Some people waste their money on tats, some on baseball cards, some on tobacco products.
quote:
I'm only talking about visible tattoos which mean face and neck and hands
quote:
probably makes bad decisions
This is my arguement. Tats are fine and I have never had any problems with anyone getting them. However, having them in these areas show poor decision skills, IMO.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 12:50 pm to jembeurt
I'll agree with you there. Kids are stupid I guess and waste money on all kinds of stuff. If he didn't have much to begin with and still spent it on neck ink, that's where his lack of maturity shines through.
Anyone can change and even regret past decisions but I'd have a hard time betting my future on a guy like that.
Anyone can change and even regret past decisions but I'd have a hard time betting my future on a guy like that.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 12:54 pm to jembeurt
quote:
However, having them in these areas show poor decision skills, IMO.
Why, though? That's my question.
Because of the whole, old business ideal of what tats mean/represent?
In the Army/Navy doc Showtime did there was a Samoan kid, honor student, stellar kid... huge Samoan tat on his arm, down to his elbow. It's family tradition and an important part of his heritage. When he got to campus they wanted him to remove part of it and it really upset him. He challenged and they relented.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 1:41 pm to OBUDan
Dan, I think we are argueing different points.
I have no problem with this. I would imagine that with a long sleeve shirt or suit, this tat is covered, right? Even if it extended to the wrist, I would probably be ok with it.
And as far as the Armed Forces goes, my ex Bro in law is in the Marines. Their policy on tats, at least as a couple of years ago, was all had to be covered by fatigues. In other words, nothing on or above the neck or on the hands. I want to say that forearms were allowed. Not completely sure though.
I am not against getting tatoos, nor do I look down upon people who get them. I'm only talking about head/neck areas. And maybe fingers/hands as well. Just my personal opinion. I also believe that tats should have meaning to the person getting them. Getting them just to get them is a bit silly.
quote:
huge Samoan tat on his arm, down to his elbow
I have no problem with this. I would imagine that with a long sleeve shirt or suit, this tat is covered, right? Even if it extended to the wrist, I would probably be ok with it.
And as far as the Armed Forces goes, my ex Bro in law is in the Marines. Their policy on tats, at least as a couple of years ago, was all had to be covered by fatigues. In other words, nothing on or above the neck or on the hands. I want to say that forearms were allowed. Not completely sure though.
I am not against getting tatoos, nor do I look down upon people who get them. I'm only talking about head/neck areas. And maybe fingers/hands as well. Just my personal opinion. I also believe that tats should have meaning to the person getting them. Getting them just to get them is a bit silly.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 2:05 pm to TigerAlum93
Your are rt tiger alumni on forgiving more talented players. now tell me how many former players with neck tattoos are analyst for espn? I haven't seen one.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 2:32 pm to jembeurt
quote:
I am not against getting tatoos, nor do I look down upon people who get them.
I understand this.
quote:
I'm only talking about head/neck areas. And maybe fingers/hands as well. Just my personal opinion. I also believe that tats should have meaning to the person getting them. Getting them just to get them is a bit silly.
I'm trying to understand why you (and seemingly everyone else) believes it reflects "poor decision making."
I would never get a tattoo on my neck or face (and I don't have any currently), but to me the perspective that "visible tattoos = bad decision making" is archaic.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 2:37 pm to OBUDan
quote:
I would never get a tattoo on my neck or face
Why not? You obviously feel that there is no problem with it.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 2:42 pm to OBUDan
quote:Clearly it depends on the tattoo. If a kid has a Norman Cross or a big heart with "RIP Mom" in the middle or something like that, that's one thing. If he has "Thug Life" or "Crip Killah" or something like that scrawled across his neck in barb wire, that suggests something different. Now there is a lot of middle ground in between there, but I guess my point is it doesn't really matter if someone has tattoos, or even where they are. It matters what their specific tattoos signify (which may not always be readily apparent).
Why, though? That's my question.
Because of the whole, old business ideal of what tats mean/represent?
In the Army/Navy doc Showtime did there was a Samoan kid, honor student, stellar kid... huge Samoan tat on his arm, down to his elbow. It's family tradition and an important part of his heritage. When he got to campus they wanted him to remove part of it and it really upset him. He challenged and they relented.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 2:44 pm to jembeurt
quote:I don't have a problem with lots of things I don't personally participate in.
Why not? You obviously feel that there is no problem with it.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 2:55 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
If he has "Thug Life" or "Crip Killah" or something like that scrawled across his neck in barb wire, that suggests something different. Now there is a lot of middle ground in between there, but I guess my point is it doesn't really matter if someone has tattoos, or even where they are. It matters what their specific tattoos signify (which may not always be readily apparent).
Well that's completely understandable. If a guy has a tat that says, "Thug Life" then it doesn't seem like a stereotype to label him a thug. He seems to be professing as much.
But I'm just curious why visible tattoos themselves mean "poor decision making" in the minds of some.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 2:56 pm to jembeurt
quote:
Why not?
Because I don't want one.
quote:
You obviously feel that there is no problem with it.
I don't. If I ran a company and a completely qualified candidate came in with a pony tat on his face, I'd hire him in a heartbeat.
That doesn't mean I want one myself.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 3:08 pm to OBUDan
Maybe if your business was a tattoo parlor or a circus show.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 3:11 pm to Chazz Reinhold
If I run a business, I'm interested in hiring people that can get me the best bottom line, not how they look in the office.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 3:24 pm to OBUDan
quote:
Maybe if your business was a tattoo parlor or a circus show.
quote:
If I run a business, I'm interested in hiring people that can get me the best bottom line, not how they look in the office.
Here is where my problem comes in. I do run a small business, and it deals with the public entirely. My technicians go inside people homes and businesses. How they look is half of their work. You obviously don't have a problem with neck tats, but a lot of people do (and no I don't have exact numbers). Everyone, and probably including you, make assesments on other people at first sight. Building trust is crucial.
We had a guy with a neck tat before I started running this business, and this kid fit the stereotype to a "T". I have also managed at Outback rest. and worked with some there. I guess this is where I base my judgements off of.
Fair or not, it is just what I think. However, like anything else, there are always exception to the rule.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 3:59 pm to Chazz Reinhold
It wouldn't affect my decision to offer the guy or not.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 4:11 pm to jembeurt
Fair enough. I was just curious what the basis for the opinion was.
Posted on 2/6/12 at 4:20 pm to OBUDan
Its cool. Now that is out of the way........
R....M....D!
R....M....D!
Posted on 2/6/12 at 4:23 pm to jembeurt
Yeah, I'll post something about that tomorrow...
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News