USMCBillsFan Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I bring this up because the Marine Corps just passed a new order. As of April 1st Marines can no longer get tattoos that can be seen in a standard pt uniform (normal t-shirt and shorts). So basically the only place a Marine can get a tattoo is on the shoulder and chest and back. As a Marine who has a few significant tattoos on my arms I think they are getting a little too micromanaging. I understand we're military and have to be "uniform" but they are taking one of the few traditions left (the Marine Corps is HUGE on tradition) and getting rid of it. If they wanted to restrict tattoos on the forearms or anything below the elbow I can understand that but I just think it's getting stupid. Marines and tattoos are synonymous with each other. All I can say is thank God I retire in a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I bring this up because the Marine Corps just passed a new order. As of April 1st Marines can no longer get tattoos that can be seen in a standard pt uniform (normal t-shirt and shorts). So basically the only place a Marine can get a tattoo is on the shoulder and chest and back. As a Marine who has a few significant tattoos on my arms I think they are getting a little too micromanaging. I understand we're military and have to be "uniform" but they are taking one of the few traditions left (the Marine Corps is HUGE on tradition) and getting rid of it. If they wanted to restrict tattoos on the forearms or anything below the elbow I can understand that but I just think it's getting stupid. Marines and tattoos are synonymous with each other. All I can say is thank God I retire in a year. What's the 'official' reason for the change? I would suppose that they could say that it is for your protection--in an urban environment tatoos would stand out--but that is bunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 What a load of crap. Some bureaucratic administrative azzholes trying to keep themselves busy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted March 28, 2007 Author Share Posted March 28, 2007 What's the 'official' reason for the change? I would suppose that they could say that it is for your protection--in an urban environment tatoos would stand out--but that is bunk. They are saying that they look "unprofessional". Sleeves are getting popular now (where the whole arm is covered). I can kind of understand not allowing sleeves because it can limit duties Marines can do, like embassy duty and such. But 95% of Marines don't do any of those duties. I think having tattoos is a part of what makes us unique. It's just one more way for them to let us know we are under their control. Another reason I can't wait to retire and be a "civilian" again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 personally, I think the whole tatoo craze has gotten out of hand....to me, nothing looks more ridiculous than a person covered in tatoo's....nothing wrong with one on the upper arm, or for girls on their ankle , other than that I think tatoo's are pretty stupid...but that is just me I bring this up because the Marine Corps just passed a new order. As of April 1st Marines can no longer get tattoos that can be seen in a standard pt uniform (normal t-shirt and shorts). So basically the only place a Marine can get a tattoo is on the shoulder and chest and back. As a Marine who has a few significant tattoos on my arms I think they are getting a little too micromanaging. I understand we're military and have to be "uniform" but they are taking one of the few traditions left (the Marine Corps is HUGE on tradition) and getting rid of it. If they wanted to restrict tattoos on the forearms or anything below the elbow I can understand that but I just think it's getting stupid. Marines and tattoos are synonymous with each other. All I can say is thank God I retire in a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 They are saying that they look "unprofessional". Sleeves are getting popular now (where the whole arm is covered). I can kind of understand not allowing sleeves because it can limit duties Marines can do, like embassy duty and such. But 95% of Marines don't do any of those duties. I think having tattoos is a part of what makes us unique. It's just one more way for them to let us know we are under their control. Another reason I can't wait to retire and be a "civilian" again. I agree with the 'unprofessional' rationale and would find it hard to overlook a very conspicuous tattoo during a job interview. Then again, I'm a finance guy in the corporate world who hires bean counters and admin folks. If I was hiring people to kill my enemies I'd probably be just fine with the tats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I bring this up because the Marine Corps just passed a new order. As of April 1st Marines can no longer get tattoos that can be seen in a standard pt uniform (normal t-shirt and shorts). So basically the only place a Marine can get a tattoo is on the shoulder and chest and back. As a Marine who has a few significant tattoos on my arms I think they are getting a little too micromanaging. I understand we're military and have to be "uniform" but they are taking one of the few traditions left (the Marine Corps is HUGE on tradition) and getting rid of it. If they wanted to restrict tattoos on the forearms or anything below the elbow I can understand that but I just think it's getting stupid. Marines and tattoos are synonymous with each other. All I can say is thank God I retire in a year. Just speculating of course, because I haven't read up on any of this...but could they be trying to crack down on gang affiliation tattoos? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted March 28, 2007 Author Share Posted March 28, 2007 I agree with the 'unprofessional' rationale and would find it hard to overlook a very conspicuous tattoo during a job interview. Then again, I'm a finance guy in the corporate world who hires bean counters and admin folks. If I was hiring people to kill my enemies I'd probably be just fine with the tats. I can see that too and some of the younger Marines don't consider life after the Marine Corps but I still think it's a personal choice that one should be able to make. I know a lot of corporate types that are completely tatted up but when they are dressed for work you can't see them. Long sleeve shirts and a tie will hide a lot...whether at work or for a job interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricojes Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 personally, I think the whole tatoo craze has gotten out of hand....to me, nothing looks more ridiculous than a person covered in tatoo's....nothing wrong with one on the upper arm, or for girls on their ankle , other than that I think tatoo's are pretty stupid...but that is just me I agree 100%, some kids don't realize that a cool tatoo on a 21 year old becomes a eye sore on a 30 year old. Don't much care for the huge tramp stamps either, smaller ones can be hot, but the ones that cover half the back are just creepy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I agree with the 'unprofessional' rationale and would find it hard to overlook a very conspicuous tattoo during a job interview. Then again, I'm a finance guy in the corporate world who hires bean counters and admin folks. If I was hiring people to kill my enemies I'd probably be just fine with the tats. Yeah I know I could care less about the professionality of a trained killer so your post does raise a good question: USMCBills, enlighten me please (not being sarcastic), is there even a reason why a Marine would be expected to look professional...? Seems like the non-meatstick Marine who might find office work with the Marines post-duty isn't the kind of person to cake himself in tattoos anyways...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 Tattoos have been contributing to Global Warming for decades, now. We need to encourage our young men and woman of our Armed forces to minimize their Global carbon imprint. </Al Gore /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted March 28, 2007 Author Share Posted March 28, 2007 Just speculating of course, because I haven't read up on any of this...but could they be trying to crack down on gang affiliation tattoos? That has always been in the tattoo order. You can't get anything on the neck or head, gang related, anything that is prejudicial to good order, discipline and morale or that bring discredit on the Marine Corps. All tattoos are screened. The majority of tattoos Marines get are the "gungy" ones, the Semper Fi's or the Eagle Globe and Anchor (Marine Symbol). Things like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I am not a fan of tatoos at all, but that said, two of my employees are covered in what I am told is extremely high-quality work (relatively speaking), and they are two of the best coders in the business so as long as they continue to deliver a quality product and good attitude, I could care less about the ink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted March 28, 2007 Author Share Posted March 28, 2007 Yeah I know I could care less about the professionality of a trained killer so your post does raise a good question: USMCBills, enlighten me please (not being sarcastic), is there even a reason why a Marine would be expected to look professional...? Seems like the non-meatstick Marine who might find office work with the Marines post-duty isn't the kind of person to cake himself in tattoos anyways...? When Marines are on embassy duty they wear a uniform that consists of the dress blue pants and a khaki colored short sleeved shirt. They say it looks unprofessional if you have a ton of tattoos visible when wearing this uniform. That's where the professional part comes in. And your other comment is true. Most of the Marines that get sleeves or elaborate tattoo work on their entire arms aren't the type to be working in a professional environment on the outside. Some do, but not most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricojes Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 I am not a fan of tatoos at all, but that said, two of my employees are covered in what I am told is extremely high-quality work (relatively speaking), and they are two of the best coders in the business so as long as they continue to deliver a quality product and good attitude, I could care less about the ink. Unless they interface with clients, it's not an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 As a rule, I think tattoos are moronic and unsightly (with some exceptions). Far from being "unique" or a statement of independence or rebellion, they (along with piercings) have become a giant brand of conformity, IMO. With that said, this seems to be a very dumb policy/regulation. You want tattoos? You should be able to have them for ANY duty. There is nothing militarily you can't do (that I can think of) because you have a tattoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted March 28, 2007 Author Share Posted March 28, 2007 The funny thing is that Marines were given until April 1st. Anything they have before that is "grandfathered" and will be documented and put into their record books. You should see the tattoo parlors here in Jacksonville. They have been swamped with Marines getting tons of work before the deadline. They can't keep up with all the work.... It's funny to see... Marines will find a way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted March 28, 2007 Author Share Posted March 28, 2007 As a rule, I think tattoos are moronic and unsightly (with some exceptions). Far from being "unique" or a statement of independence or rebellion, they (along with piercings) have become a giant brand of conformity, IMO. With that said, this seems to be a very dumb policy/regulation. You want tattoos? You should be able to have them for ANY duty. There is nothing militarily you can't do (that I can think of) because you have a tattoo. There are so many opinions on tattoos. May feel the same as you and many don't. I just think it takes away from the freedom that we fight to protect. Tattoos are a growing trend in society today, especially with the popularity of shows like "Miami Ink" and "Inked". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 There are so many opinions on tattoos. May feel the same as you and many don't. I just think it takes away from the freedom that we fight to protect. Tattoos are a growing trend in society today, especially with the popularity of shows like "Miami Ink" and "Inked". No doubt, and you guys fight to protect those freedoms. They shouldn't be taken away from you, IMO. That's just crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopsGuy Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 When I was a freshman in college, I mentioned to an ink-ed up friend that I might someday want a tatoo. His advice was to make sure I got it somewhere where I wouldn't see it much. His reasoning was that I'd get sick of seeing the same "art" day after day. This told me that tatoos were for other people to view, not for the person sporting the art. We all know that the in the military, you're trained to think of the unit first, and yourself last. Back in the day, tatoos were synonymous with military service. The forearm tatoo with the unit insignia was something a veteran wore proudly. These days, every 23 year old girl has the "tramp stamp" license plate. More and more recruits are showing up with ink, and well, it just doesn't look great at PT to see all these folks displaying their individuality. I don't necessarily agree with the new policy, but I understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts