I agree about the judgmental thing. I have never wanted a tattoo, but it may be age related. I do however know that you can never judge a book by it’s cover.
As former CJ Instructor, we teach people that the bad guy is rarely the one you think it is, especially if you are judging by tattoos or physical attributes. For instance: Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, and neither Hillary or Bill Clinton have any tattoos....yet all of these people would be dangerous to have known! Obama had no tattoos either, that I could see?
As for jobs, I know a lot of people w tattoos who work everyday in jobs they love! So, although I do NOT care for tattoos, nor do I have one, it isn’t the way to determine a person’s worth! The past two generations have considered ‘body art’ a part of their culture. Enough said!
As far as tats, it's not always JUST having a tat, it's the type and location.
It also includes many other things.
You can show me 2 people with the exact same tattoo in the same location on their bodies and I can have differing opinions.
Does the tat make or break the person?
NO!
But it is A PART of the overall picture.
Their can be a guy with a tat, that is just one of the boys.
Another guy with a tat/s, that is the "bad boy" with the ladies.
Another guy, trying to be trouble.
And another WHO IS.
Then, of course there is the quiet, clean cut guy, who to most seems unassuming, but his body language and alertness "scream" that he could probably take apart most anybody in the room.
Well that's where you're wrong. Actually you CAN discern quite a bit from the cover.
Study says you're wrong.