Providers with tattoos

Sheep herder, what if she had covered her tattoo with a band aid and you never noticed it and hired her, let's say she has been able to cover it up or hide it per say for about a month and during that month you find out she is one hell of a worker and then one day oops she forgets to cover it it up and you notice, are you then going to fire her?

The other employees are good about running off people we don't like and if they couldn't run her off we would fire her ass for not getting along with coworkers.

Wow is all I have to say

I am not a fan of tattoos but I respect others that have them. It is very sad when a woman continues to canvas her body from head to toe with tats. Just my humble opinion!

Company and hiring personnel go hand in hand. Shitty, two for two.

Good to know UT keeps churning out "winners" with worthless degrees! They sure are dumbing down and minimizing the degrees of THOSE of US who got them when a University Degree ACTUALLY meant you HAD an education...

Unfortunately too many don the Hepatitus "A"rt magnet stamp of approval so finding one without is like finding a libtard with a brain - rather impossible.

It's rather sad that "the machines" have caused people to lose the ability to communicate in person to person dialogue so much they must "talk through their tattoos"...true testament to the dumbing down of our once great Nation. Think of it, BEFORE man could communicate via dialogue, prose or written word Neanderthals drew on cave walls & themselves BCUZ they couldn't communicate by any other means...so evolution is NOW going BACKWARDS...

There are SOME non-tattooed Honey's but rare indeed. I can only think of very very few (Linnea, SexxySamantha, Claire of SGBJ, Willow of SGBJ...and these are now mainly gone from our midst...) and of course there are many others. But WHO?
Originally Posted by Kuhlarrow

It's funny how many hookers claim to be educated and classy like that makes them a better fuck. Tens of thousands of dollars spent on their minds yet their pussy is still the most financially valuable asset they have.... Even if they are only a tatted up bbw.....

My Grandfather retired as a Commander in the Navy. Father a Chief in same. They both had tats, dad had more than a few. I went USAF. Saw them all the time, but most tried to keep them discrete. I was in a high tech field, but a lot of techies also like tats. Later in my career (I was in from 84-99), I think the military started not taking new recruits that had "visible" tats. Originally Posted by BigGuy13

My Dad was a MD, worked in cardiology, brother was a veterinarian in the AF. I worked for a group that was out of Fort Meade, and now they are in San Antonio, also, a 3 letter agency. Tats are definitely not acceptable to them. They checked everything we did so tats were not an option. We just worked for totally different groups.

I really don't get this tat thing.. I don't even get why people pay big bucks for Picaso, Van Gough, Michaelangelo, ... After a minute looking at their work, I want to do something else. Now women, I can look at them forever, the curves in their eyes, big round butts, thick lips, shapely bodies, ...that is art.

Yes a visible tattoo makes her unemployable the conservative customers tend to find tattoos offensive and we are not hiring people that are customers might possibly find offensive. It's her right to get a tattoo and it's are right to not hire her because she has a tattoo. Originally Posted by Sheep Herder

I do not know what business you are involved in but based on what you have said it sounds like some type of storefront. I am curious how many customer complaints were lodged before the no tattoo policy was put in place. What other issues have customers raised that changed your hiring policy? Have people complained about hair color or styles? Have customers complained about ethnic appearances or dialects? have customers complained about jewelry or shoes? In my experience with such I had a policy of looking at the contributions of the employee to assess value not the complaint of a customer about appearance.

I know you aren't going to change your policy or see a person you can't easily identify with as having value, and I am not attempting to change your mind on anything. I just find it odd that narrowmindedness is so readily accepted.

Tattoos are the sign of only one thing: You're a follower, not a leader. When no one had them, no one got them. Now, they are "trendy," so just about everyone has ink. In other words, you're a crwod follower. Most of the females who have ink would have cringed at the idea of a tattoo 25 years ago. So, yeah, just trendy, and only weak people are driven by trends.

What never changes about tattoos, trendy or not, is that they are one stupid, ugly fucking thing to do to beautiful female skin. Close second? Fake tits. Yep, stupid as all stupidity can get. unless they are for someone who had cancer, etc. they are stupid and foolish. ALL natural breasts of all sizes are lovely and fun...fake ones, not at all.


Have I fucked chicks with ink or fake balloons? Sure. But I would never date one. Oh gosh, I am already cracking up at all the people who will get offended! Like I give a fuck. None of you care about the people who are grossed out by your ink-blotted skin that looks like some form of blue dermatosis. Oh geez this is fun.

Tattoos are the sign of only one thing: You're a follower, not a leader. When no one had them, no one got them. Now, they are "trendy," so just about everyone has ink. In other words, you're a crwod follower. Most of the females who have ink would have cringed at the idea of a tattoo 25 years ago. So, yeah, just trendy, and only weak people are driven by trends. Originally Posted by Wixchill

I guess this is technically accurate. some 5,000 years ago, someone got a tattoo. and ever since everyone else has been a follower. The same can be said for walking upright; such (bipedal) sheep we all are.

Dipshittery galore! Such an awesome thread. Thanks chincho.

"These questions of taste, of feeling, of inheritance, need no settlement. Everyone carries his own inch-rule of taste, and amuses himself by applying it, triumphantly, wherever he travels."

Henry Adams

Personally don't agree the the "follower" reasoning for getting tattooed. To each his own is my thinking. Right off, just from basic history I've learned tattoos are nothing New, they were used as symbols of status as well as tribal initiation etc. So decided to google and found this rather interesting piece of info : http://www.designboom.com/history/tattoo_history.html

Hmmm. You must have been in a different military. I come from a military family, and I served in the military, no tats on any of us. I didn't even know anyone in the military with a tat but I served with people that were pretty intelligent, no grunts. Originally Posted by oneman

Stupidest thing I've read in a long time. I'd say 75% of people in my squadron had ink. Officers and enlisted. Military definitely WAS trying to crack down on it around 2000ish up until recently. Now I think they're reversing that. While I was in, usmc came up with tats can't cover x amount of skin on a given area. Everyone had to get pictures taken so there was evidence of what was currently inked.
I had to get pic taken of mine prior to enlisting, I think so they check it for gang affiliations.

Way to disrespect an entire group of the military also with your grunt comment....

What an asshole. I own several businesses worth millions of dollars and 15 years ago I went to a meeting for a very large local development with Owners out of Dallas, investors, etc. I was the only person out of 20 wearing a suit. Never again and it has not hurt my business one iota. While I do not like the tramp stamps, nice body art is here and you should not be so judgmental as to not hire this person or even give them a chance. Do you feel the same about woman, blacks and gays. Grow up!