Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Tattoo you? Female applicant turned down due to her tattoo.

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Tattoo you? Female applicant turned down due to her tattoo.

Old 16th Mar 2016, 10:15
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @RAF_IFA
Posts: 3,265
Tattoo you? Female applicant turned down due to her tattoo.

I guess this is going to be, generally, an age thing.

Tattoo rules prevent potential RAF recruit from landing her dream job (From Oxford Mail)
Al R is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 10:19
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nirvana
Posts: 112
Depends - if it's visible and unsightly it may be considered inappropriate or grotesque
Cyber Bob is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 10:51
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,183
I don't know if it has changed but they were never to be visible and in catering especially it was taboo, as they are up her neck above the collar I totally agree with the stance. once you let one in sight like that, you would then have to justify each and every one, from flowers like hers through to swastikas.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 11:19
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Peterborough
Posts: 76
Check the link; stars on her upper neck, therefore visible in uniform!
romeo bravo is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 11:43
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Location: Location!
Posts: 1,866
The article U.S. Marines change the women's uniform to allow enlisted females to cover tattoos | Daily Mail Online, indicates that the USMC are prepared to change their uniform rules in order to comply with their requirement that there should be no visible tattoos so, if the Royal Air Force were to adopt a similar approach, it would appear that Laura Hill might have to adopt another style of headgear in order to comply.

Removal of a tattoo is of course another option, and one which the Royal Navy certainly applied when a disenchanted young sailor had "I hate the Navy" tattooed.....on his forehead. The removal was very painfully undertaken on unpaid leave but, when the sailor subsequently served in sunny climes, the words reappeared, albeit faintly, greatly to his subsequent regret, a feeling I suspect so many others must share.

Jack
Union Jack is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 12:18
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Stamford
Posts: 475
I just don't believe this happened the way it's reported.

There are many, many people serving who have tattoos that are visible when wearing uniform and, since I met him just yesterday, there's at least one young man with very noticable body modifications.
Stuff is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 12:49
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,183
I suppose it depends whether they got them prior to service or after.
In her case and altering the uniform to cover it up, do they do an RAF hijab. plus are you seriously going to alter the uniform of every serving RAF female to simply adhere to the whims of this one person? I think not.
A bit of a case of if it was her desire to become a member of the RAF, she should have learnt the requirements before decorating her body so. Her choice and her consequences.

As for the army rules

http://www.army.mod.uk/news/26584.aspx

Hers appear not to be on the rear of her neck, but the side, so may well be inadmissible in full time service.

A change to the Queen’s regulations means that body art can now be displayed on the hands and rear of the neck – two areas that were previously banned.
Surely that applies to all forces?
NutLoose is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 13:26
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: On my favourite chair
Age: 51
Posts: 10
Why should the RAF change it's regulations? Tattoos, in my opinion are unsightly. When someone in uniform is showing an armful of tattoos then that is even worse. Just because society has decided that tattoos are more acceptable does not mean that the RAF should change. What next, wearing of uniform trousers with designer rips or the waist band worn half way down my backside just because some so called trend setter has decided it's OK? We need to stop changing to suit people; the rules are there, and if you cannot comply with them then do not join. It's your choice after all.
High Average is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 14:45
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 818
The rules are quite clear. If they are visible in No1 SD, so essentially hands and necks, then they are to be rejected.

She isn't the first and won't be the last. Many people have them removed to get in.

As others have stated the Army policy is much more relaxed, she can jog on there if she likes.
downsizer is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 14:52
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,400
Or, we could let the best people in regardless of how they look?

It's a crazy idea I know, but looking good on a parade is no longer important on the field of war.

We used to not want tattooed oiks because it was indicative of the sort of person they probably are.
Society has moved on and I know loads of aircrew officers with tattoos.

Get a life.
Tourist is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 14:55
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 818
But, but, but, THE RULES!!!! FFS.
downsizer is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 15:13
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,400
You do know that the rules are laid down by people and the people can change the rules, yes?

An example is the fact that she is gay.
That used to disqualify her, but now it does not.
Tourist is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 15:23
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: lyneham, wilts, Uk
Posts: 36
Tattoos in the 21st Centuary

If you consider the changes that have been made regarding sexual orientation, co habiting, being pregnant whilst in service and the ability of trans gender individuals all being allowed to serve. It does seem quite ridiculous that an individual should be positively discriminated against due to the location of a tattoo. If it were offensive or inflammatory then perhaps they should be given the option to have it removed or covered over. Otherwise I don't see the problem
ukcds is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 15:33
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 178
Maybe she was turned down because she was useless (and showed poor judgement, obviously).
New entry requirement: "Confirm all tattoos are correctly spelt" (or spelled, for US military?)
Minnie Burner is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 15:38
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 818
You do know that the rules are laid down by people and the people can change the rules, yes?
Right, stop that now. Clearly you are taking the piss....
downsizer is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 17:36
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,183
Society has moved on and I know loads of aircrew officers with tattoos.

This way up? left hand... right hand? All useful tattoos
NutLoose is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 18:00
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE England
Age: 46
Posts: 118
This is not a case of discrimination, it's a case of uniformity. Men can't wear beards and sideburns have to be trimmed no lower than the midpoint of the ear. The fact that society has moved on doesn't matter a bit. Her appearance doesn't meet the uniform standards because of a conscious decision she has made. Sorry, it's their train set I'm afraid.
Airbus38 is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 20:52
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 501
Hold on, if men can't wear beards, does that mean ladies can?
27mm is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 21:11
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,633
An age thing? yep!!

I'm to the right end of "middle aged" and I think it's change the rules and get the best people on board!!!
glad rag is offline  
Old 16th Mar 2016, 21:11
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 786
No rules against ladies with beards as far as I'm aware, presumably as long as it's kept neat & trimmed. I know for certain that WRAFs can & do wear moustaches....
Ken Scott is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.