Posted on 10/08/2017 4:30:16 AM PDT by Redmen4ever
Have a tattoo? If the answer is “yes,” it’s more likely you’re unemployed or completely out of the labor force. On average, your income is lower. You’re more probably a smoker, use illegal drugs, engage in risky sexual behavior, have been a victim of crime, and have been incarcerated for committing crime yourself.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.heartland.org ...
Ecclesiastes 12:8
None of the women or men in my family have any piercings ie ears or anything else.
I’ve cautioned both my kids against inking themselves, and suggested if they really NEED to get one, to place it where no one can see. So far neither have shown any interest.
I don’t personally care for them, but at least it used to be that people who were inked were either criminals or on the fringe and interesting. It’s no longer fringe, so we’re left with losers and the masses... so no longer “cool” at all.
Stereotyping will never go away. It’s human nature. Even virtue-signaling liberals stereotype as we saw with the Las Vegas shooting, in which it was automatically assumed that anybody attending a country music concert are conservative Trump supporters. So even they stereotype .
Anybody with visible neck, facial or hand tattoos are going to be assumed to be some sort of outlaw, convict or lowlife until proven otherwise. Most companies will not hire them and will come up with a reason why so they are not sued for discrimination. Just the way it is. It’s a cruel world and those who deface their bodies with tattoos just make it harder on themselves.
Not talking about tattoos that are normally covered by clothing out in public but the tattoos that cannot be easily hidden.
There are a great many things that don’t help you get ahead in the professional world; a club foot for instance. Doesn’t help much in a footrace either.
But that’s not what the article or most commenters are saying. They say only idiots and criminals get tattooed... I’m disagreeing.
No, what it says is that all other things being equal, a person without tats is going to have an advantage over a person with tats.
Again, I’m disagreeing.
Don’t try to tell me I can’t read. “I would never hire anyone with a visible tattoo” isn’t “all other things being equal, blah,blah,blah”.
rac·ist
/ˈrāsəst/
adjective
showing or feeling discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or believing that a particular race is superior to another.
bi·ased
/ˈbīəst/
adjective
unfairly prejudiced for or against someone or something.
Since the comments have absolutely nothing to do with race, it cannot be a racist way of thinking.
What the article shows, is that people have a certain bias towards tattoos.
Some have a favorable bias,
Others an unfavorable bias.
Either way, race has nothing to do with it.
So it is a biased way of thinking.
(question: do you have tattoos???)
John 11:35
Tattoos are God’s way of warning others to the presence of Evil. Sometimes is is just the mischievous little Devil on the shoulder saying: “get that eagle and Semper Fi to show em you’re a badass for life,” and sometimes its the real Devil saying: “get that replica of Charles Manson on your cheek to show em your a badass lifer.”
Either way, they are a bad idea.
Won’t jump on you for that comment; the only time I ever considered a tattoo was just out of boot camp.
Couldn’t find any tat artist that could render the BIRD ON THE BALL with enough detail to satisfy me.
Still think the Eagle Globe and Anchor would look good on my left shoulder though.
I don’t do John.
Per the article:
Have a tattoo? If the answer is “yes,” it’s more likely you’re...
So, it's not what the article said at all. You said, they said, only idiots and criminals get tattoos.
The article says more likely.
If 10% of the people without tattoos were either criminals or idiots, versus 20% of people with tattoos were criminals or idiots.
It doesn't mean that only people with tattoos are criminals and idiots, but that they have a higher chance of being that way.
I meant no offence.
Try this one: 1 Samuel 2:2
My comprehension is fine, thanks.
” not what the article *or most commenters are saying”..
Read the comments I’ve taken the time to reply to...
Why should you get slammed; you were doing your job to protect your organizations reputation and good name!
As an example of my largest red flags, I give you Stanley Johnson!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.