• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

tattoos and social rules

I

Ihaveaspergers

Active Member
I am really confused. It is said that how you look matters. Does it really? I see a lot of people with "crazy" tattoos and they even have "normal" jobs and all of that. So how you look doesn't actually matter?
Some policemen look really "weird": https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/17/article-2218787-158AD969000005DC-974_1024x615_large.jpg

So looking proper is unimportant today? I am confused. Tattoos makes you look like you have "issues". Maybe they were or are in a criminal or suspicious gang.
 
It used to be a real stigma if you were covered in tattoos. Might still be if you have them on the face. Those police can be ex military, etc, many of whom are tattooed.

Seems that skin art is no longer seen as a barrier to certain things. Society seems a little more enlightened these days when it comes to things like this.
 
l work with people that have tats. Some make me feel a tab uncomfortable. But that's my problem. l am old school. Woman are increasingly getting them. They are more like earnings or a purse now a days. Wearable skin art.
 
I'm fairly old-school & think propriety & decorum are most important. But tattoos are becoming more socially acceptable & people aren't being discriminated against as much for wearing them. This, to me, seems more proper--I will think always that no tats looks better than even cool tats, but what looks even better than natural skin AND awesome tats combined? People looking past superficial appearance, style choice, and aesthetics & hiring others of their fellow humans.
 
As long as the spelling is correct and it isn't obvious a cell mate or other inmate got busy with the inks,
then I don't really care.
Live and let live.
 
SimonSays said:
It used to be a real stigma if you were covered in tattoos. Might still be if you have them on the face. Those police can be ex military, etc, many of whom are tattooed.

Seems that skin art is no longer seen as a barrier to certain things. Society seems a little more enlightened these days when it comes to things like this.
Click to expand...
so tattoos mean that they want us to see them as tough cool guys?

Gerontius said:
I'm fairly old-school & think propriety & decorum are most important. But tattoos are becoming more socially acceptable & people aren't being discriminated against as much for wearing them. This, to me, seems more proper--I will think always that no tats looks better than even cool tats, but what looks even better than natural skin AND awesome tats combined? People looking past superficial appearance, style choice, and aesthetics & hiring others of their fellow humans.
Click to expand...
and men with longer hair was not very common in the early 1900's (except for some indigenious people i guess). I have longer hair. But I don't like tattoos as they might say "i am a person with issues". maybe that was a thing of the past? also I have problems understanding why people love Picasso paintings. I guess Carl Larsson is more in my taste. that could be an aspie thing. most abstract art and cubism is really difficult for me.
tattoos don't really look like real art to me but that is my taste I guess.
i don't even have a good argument against tattoos other than what the represented in the past.

what looks proper changes a lot. Who knows what will look proper in 2 years.
 
Last edited:
I never understood why people have a problem with tattoos. Some of them may be crude and horrible, but honestly most of what I've seen aren't bad at all. I don't have any, but I kind of want one myself.

My work (a casino) has a policy that tattoos must be covered up, but I don't think this is enforced at all.
 
'Tis all a matter of fashion. It isn't how you look, it is how fashionable you look. Some employers are more concerned about a traditional fashion statement with their workforce while other's couldn't care less. I once worked for an employer that would let you work from home but only if you had multiple web cams on you at all times. Part of what they wanted to make sure of was whether you were still wearing a shirt and tie to work. Mind you, it was an email and text tech support job where you would never see a customer.

If ratty pants, toplessness, and a bone thru the nose become fashionable then you'll see it in some workplaces.
 
Ihaveaspergers said:
men with longer hair was not very common in the early 1900's (except for some indigenious people i guess). I have longer hair.
Click to expand...

Check out historical hairstyles--men used to actually style their hair in the 1900s. The 1940s, '50s, and '60s is where the military haircut became the norm. There's a stylistic difference between a guy in 1909 wearing pince-nez and drinking absinthe in a cafe, and a guy in 1955 building an A-bomb shelter and listening to Civil Defense bulletins.
 
I
Ihaveaspergers said:
I am really confused. It is said that how you look matters. Does it really? I see a lot of people with "crazy" tattoos and they even have "normal" jobs and all of that. So how you look doesn't actually matter?
Some policemen look really "weird": https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/17/article-2218787-158AD969000005DC-974_1024x615_large.jpg

So looking proper is unimportant today? I am confused. Tattoos makes you look like you have "issues". Maybe they were or are in a criminal or suspicious gang.
Click to expand...
I have over forty tattoos including hands and have a normal job. I’ve never been in prison a gang or military and i don’t follow fashions. Sometimes I see people staring at me but ha ho I wouldn’t recognise you I five minutes anyway. I’ve wondered in the past why I like tattoos and got so many, part of my mask maybe who knows. Anyway have a good day.
 
Au Naturel said:
'Tis all a matter of fashion. It isn't how you look, it is how fashionable you look. Some employers are more concerned about a traditional fashion statement with their workforce while other's couldn't care less. I once worked for an employer that would let you work from home but only if you had multiple web cams on you at all times. Part of what they wanted to make sure of was whether you were still wearing a shirt and tie to work. Mind you, it was an email and text tech support job where you would never see a customer.

If ratty pants, toplessness, and a bone thru the nose become fashionable then you'll see it in some workplaces.
Click to expand...

This is pretty much it. (Also, your former employer sounds like a complete whackadoodle and definitely not someone I would ever want to work for.)

I look at it this way: I want the BEST professionals, not the PRETTIEST. When I find out that someone is not hiring people for some reason related to appearance, I think that they're possibly overlooking the most skilled individuals in favor of the best looking individuals, and I definitely want the most skilled individuals. To put it another way, I don't want to hire the best looking electrician, I want to hire the one who won't burn my house down.

There are notable exceptions to this - I wouldn't want to work with someone who has Nazi tattoos for example. Or someone who doesn't bathe regularly. But as long as everyone is tidy and their choice of body art isn't harming anyone (or declaring that they have a desire to harm people), I don't give a rip what they look like. Are they skilled at the job they are hired for? Perfect!
 
In small towns in my area, tattoos still hold some stigma, making it harder to get work. In larger towns in my area, they're considered cool and sexy, so it's actually a plus to have tattoos. So it partly depends where you are. I've read that it's almost impossible to get a job in Japan if you have tattoos.
 
lolcatal said:
In small towns in my area, tattoos still hold some stigma, making it harder to get work. In larger towns in my area, they're considered cool and sexy, so it's actually a plus to have tattoos. So it partly depends where you are. I've read that it's almost impossible to get a job in Japan if you have tattoos.
Click to expand...
I think there's a social association that suggests that if you have tattoos then you're probably a member of the yakuza. There's a similar association in the US ("if you have tattoos, you must be a gang member") but it's starting to fade.
 
I love tattoos! I only have one, but I want more. I just never have the money to justify the expense. They were more stigmatized where I grew up, but I've expanded my experiences since then. Time changes general societal norms like that, too.
 
Ihaveaspergers said:
I am really confused. It is said that how you look matters. Does it really? I see a lot of people with "crazy" tattoos and they even have "normal" jobs and all of that. So how you look doesn't actually matter?
Some policemen look really "weird": https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/1
0/17/article-2218787-
158AD969000005DC-974_1024x615_large.jpg

So looking proper is unimportant today? I am confused. Tattoos makes you look like you have "issues".
Maybe they were or are in a criminal or suspicious gang.
Click to expand...

Lothian and Borders are now Police Scotland, regional divisions got merged into one force

According to this story aspies like the police uniform and rules

'The uniform and the rules attract autistic people to join the police'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom