Why Tattoos Should Be Allowed In The Workplace

Student’s Name Professor’s Name Course Date of Submission Why Tattoos should be allowed in the Workplace Introduction Thirty years ago, very few people had tattoos on their bodies. Today, 1 in every 10 people in the United States has a tattoo and a third of these are people aged between 25 and 30 years (Elzweig and Donna 13). As liberties are increasing in the society, body art or tattoos are also becoming a part of mainstream culture. According to Elzweig and Donna (13), a study conducted by the Pew Research Center discovered that 40% of individuals aged between 18 and 29 had at least one tattoo, as well as body piercings, which they view as a form of self-expression. In most cases, many people feel the need to cover up or avoid having tattoos in their workplaces. This is because of an inherent perception that tattoos are not suitable for work environments. However, over time this assumption has been destroyed as more and more employers begin to embrace people employees their tattoos. It is important to analyze one major argument against tattoos in the workplace. Further, it is essential to argue why tattoos should be allowed in the workplace based on work ethic, professionalism, discrimination, changing times, and religious grounds. One major refutation against tattoos in the workplace is that they can be offensive. Anderson (134) argues that what may not be offensive to one person could be offensive to another. This goes for tattoos because many who oppose them in the workplace believe that the message and even appearance of most tattoos is offensive and destructing. For example, having a tattoo of a skeleton or a gun that is visible could be viewed as offensive to many people. Anderson (134) says that there is a potential for a tattoo to generate ill-will in the workplace and this is not what employers are looking to have. Ideally, not all employees are willing to accept soft or even appealing tattoos because people’s view of what is offensive differs significantly. For instance, an employee could come in one day with a visible tattoo of a swastika on his body. This is an image that generates a lot of negative feelings around the world and those who see it will definitely feel that it is inappropriate. For others, it could be she suffered loss during the holocaust and the tattoo could just be a memory. This contradictory meaning of one tattoo creates problems and as it becomes offensive to those who do not understand the individual. Further, larger tattoos are destructing and for many people, this is also offensive. Other employees would be forced to look at the tattoo and thus can make someone feel very uncomfortable. In this way, as long as people in the workplace do not think the same, the messages of tattoos could feel offensive depending on a person’s point of view (Foltz 592). The offensive nature of tattoos has raised a lot of controversy with many feeling that such views are an indicator that tattoos should not be allowed in the workplace. The question is, “what if the tattoos are not offensive?” One major reason why tattoos should be allowed in the workplace is because people should be judged on their work ethic and not on their tattoos. Foltz (593) argues that having a tattoo does not affect a person’s brain ...