LinkedIn-nappropriate: tattoos

Right. I may go off on a rant here, but you clicked on it. You’ve probably got a 7 minute read below, but you best go through it all.

To start with, I found what I like to call a ‘LinkedInnappropriate’ (patent pending) image of me deciding how many portions of padron peppers would be frowned upon in Ibiza 2 years ago.

I’m using it as bait and I’m rolling with it.

It’s littered with unprofessionalism. Hoop earrings bigger than my future prospects (apparently), tattoos, a low cut top which people might not handle and a face that doesn’t scream ‘let’s be friends’.

If it was my profile picture, I’d be taken less seriously than if it was a professional head shot, no?

Anyway, those little suggestion articles which are ‘good for engagement’ on the top right of your LinkedIn page are usually just a load of guff. I rarely pay much attention to them, but one can’t help but notice ‘Are tattoos a bad career move?’ when it’s sat staring at you.

You know what isn’t a career move? Tattoos. You know what is? Spending time writing crap articles about things that are trivial (like me right now) for the clout.

People who sport visible tattoos have a tendency to act on impulse and are thus more reckless than those without body art, according to recent findings from McMaster University in Canada.

First of all, Canada, I thought better of you. Also, body art is a stupid term.

Second, shouldn’t we be studying things that might stop this sorry world coming to an abrupt end, rather than whether or not I’ll get a bit lairy on a work Christmas party after a couple shandys because I’ve got tattoos? Sleeves or no sleeves, I’ll probably be one of the first stood on a table.

So you know what, I was fair about it. I thought hey, they must know what they’re doing. They’ve studied for years, their life’s work so far had led up to this, there is probably some solid backbone to it all.

Turns out I was wrong. Lesson learned. Stop giving people the benefit of the doubt.

Long story short, they gave 1,000 people two options. Apparently, those with tattoos were more indecisive than those without. That’s it. That was literally it.

And the worst part?

The researchers ran it on 781 people without tattoos and 255 (I mean, totally fair numbers already let’s be honest) with tattoos, 68 of which were still visible when clothed (irrelevant additional info for you there, but their parents must be so disappointed) to measure how short sighted they were.

Not like if they needed glasses when watching videos on the internet on how to start a riot or stomp on a head, like, here’s $1, take it now or in three weeks you can have $2.50.

If you can afford a tattoo, why bother waiting around 3 weeks anyway for 2.50? And why did you even have time to participate in something so mundane? Surely you should be practising your circus tricks, shining your grill or threatening children?

Plus, I’d like to know what constitutes as a tattoo to these people. I’m sure over half of them probably only had Rihanna lyrics across the top of their shoulder.

Ol’ Bradley Ruffle, a behavioural economist with expertise in pricing, retail sales, business strategy and negotiations’ said “from an economic perspective, this decision to have a tattoo is puzzling. Tattoos are about making some kind of statement. But why not just dye your hair or get a personalized tshirt you can remove?”

Brad, did I sit through hours of getting tattooed for you? No.

Do I want a personalised tshirt? No.

Was my hair already dyed? Yes.

Did I think “oh boy, I hope my future employer doesn’t mind what I’m doing right now?” No, I didn’t.

Wanna know why? Because I’d never work somewhere that had such old-fashioned views. Mostly because they wouldn’t let me write what I want to on the internet and have I got time for that? No I bloody don’t.

It’s 2019, Ruffle, come on.

I’ve never had a problem getting a job. I’ve got visible tattoos, and even worse, I’m female. My hands are too soft to go work on a construction site with the rest of the burly tattooed men. Please let me work in your office.

I’m going to count them now for articles sake… I’ve got 56.

56 that smack you in the face when you look at me. My mum has stopped crying about it now, so should you. After the first few times of meeting me you just get over it. The questions and comments usually stop and conversation is more focused on my RBF.

If you’re basing competency on something so trivial, you should judge your own first.

Realise that what people do with their own body is none of your business and you take them for what they can do, not what they’ve got on them.

Because I’ve got tattoos, does that make me less capable to do my job? Because Katie down the street hasn’t got an eagle on her stomach or some dots on her fingers, can she write better than me? If she can, it won’t be because of my tattoos and apparent indecisiveness.

To make this relevant and less of a rant, let me loosely tie it to recruitment for a paragraph or two.

Apparently, people with visible tattoos are 13% less likely to be called back for a second job interview and if they are offered, it’s with a lower salary. I’m not entirely sure where these stats originated, but they are a load of old cobblers, too.

Prejudice exists everywhere. In my lifetime it’ll never change, so why should I get my knickers in a twist over a corporate office not wanting me to be the face of their business?

Let’s now come together to take a moment, spare a thought for those working for such bigoted companies and who can’t exercise their own personal interests because someone at their office says so.

M x