General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This needs to be said: Not hiring someone because they have tattoos is anti-progressive. [View all]Warpy
(114,407 posts)While it shouldn't be this way, it's the reality of the situation.
A lot of my coworkers at the hospital sported tats, but they were low key and mostly concealed by clothing. It was no big deal. Nobody had horns, split tongues, or other really aggressive body modification. They likely wouldn't have been hired with that because they'd frighten the elderly, not good.
There has to be a certain amount of discretion in cases like that. Perhaps when the kids now in their 20s and going in for this stuff reach their 70s and 80s, they'll be old folks who are perfectly acclimated to caregivers with lizard skin tats, horns, and split tongues. However, it's not the case today.
Having the freedom to do this stuff is quite different from having the widest employment possibilities open to you. If you do the first, you'll find the second curtailed. It will take a little more time for this stuff to be mainstream enough that you'll see bank tellers with it.