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

USAF Authorises Hand & Neck Tattoos

Wikiposts
Search
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.

USAF Authorises Hand & Neck Tattoos

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10th Mar 2023, 09:39
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,908 Likes on 1,247 Posts
So someone applies to join the RAF and is accepted in, he has a beard.. months later he decides to shave it off and has a tattoo under it... Then what?
NutLoose is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2023, 09:47
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Station 42
Age: 69
Posts: 1,081
Received 92 Likes on 38 Posts
If a young person was really keen on a military career, it would indicate that he/she had the discipline not to embellish excluded parts of themselves prior to applying, just as they'd be required to hold all educational qualifications noted in the recruitment brochures. Don't conform, don't get in...
(I realise I'll be written off as a miserable old git. )

stevef is online now  
Old 10th Mar 2023, 14:23
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,460
Received 363 Likes on 212 Posts
The UK armed forces have suffered from recruitment and retention issues for years

Setting out "standards" that reduce the size of the pool doesn't help - especially when those standards have little to with potential fighting performance and seem more driven by aesthetics
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2023, 15:02
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 628
Received 197 Likes on 111 Posts
Originally Posted by stevef
If a young person was really keen on a military career, it would indicate that he/she had the discipline not to embellish excluded parts of themselves prior to applying, just as they'd be required to hold all educational qualifications noted in the recruitment brochures. Don't conform, don't get in...
It's a big stretch to suggest that non-compliance with a previous generation's idea of personal aesthetics is down to a lack of discipline.

Younger people are far less likely to smoke than older generations. If you were in the military I'm sure you'll have had many colleagues who smoked. Was that caused by a lack of discipline? Unlike tattoos, smoking might actually impact how well you get the job done. If it's acceptable to recruit people who can't look after their health to the best of their ability, why exclude others on the basis of mere aesthetics?
pasta is online now  
The following 2 users liked this post by pasta:
Old 10th Mar 2023, 20:56
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Received 22 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by Asturias56
especially when those standards have little to with potential fighting performance and seem more driven by aesthetics
So following that logic, why not bin the dress regs completely then? Only wear uniforms when on parades or when in fighting mode, so just wear civvies; have your hair as long as or in whatever fashion you like; have as many earrings and tatts as you like? So I can grow a full set of face fuzz but can't grow sideburns to the bottom of my ears?

If what you look like has little effect on fighting performance, why don't we just abolish all that and save a ton of cash on clothing too? More people might want to join then (or even stay in) if they don't have to worry about fitting in, or meeting standards? Coz that's the point, right?

Where is the future line to be drawn? I'll look forward to seeing what RAF 2030 will look like!
Jobza Guddun is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2023, 21:13
  #26 (permalink)  

"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 77
Posts: 4,142
Received 224 Likes on 66 Posts
I can't agree with that. The uniform is a symbol of pride, and I'm sure that those with tattoos are as proud of the force, and their role in is, as anyone.
I'm an old fogey, and I don't particularly like tattoos but if the guy or gal is a good pilot, engineer, administrator, doctor, or any other member of the force, let them get on with it.
Herod is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2023, 22:00
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 1,406
Received 40 Likes on 22 Posts
Originally Posted by Jobza Guddun
So following that logic, why not bin the dress regs completely then? Only wear uniforms when on parades or when in fighting mode, so just wear civvies; have your hair as long as or in whatever fashion you like; have as many earrings and tatts as you like? So I can grow a full set of face fuzz but can't grow sideburns to the bottom of my ears?

If what you look like has little effect on fighting performance, why don't we just abolish all that and save a ton of cash on clothing too? More people might want to join then (or even stay in) if they don't have to worry about fitting in, or meeting standards? Coz that's the point, right?

Where is the future line to be drawn? I'll look forward to seeing what RAF 2030 will look like!
You seem to describe a cohesive, dedicated group, capable of deadly results. Hmm.. they almost sound like rogues who could be heroes.
Conformity to past mores led us into WW1 trenches and cavalry charges.
Perhaps it's time to move into the 21st century.
beardy is online now  
Old 10th Mar 2023, 22:21
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,077
Received 151 Likes on 53 Posts
Originally Posted by stevef
If a young person was really keen on a military career, it would indicate that he/she had the discipline not to embellish excluded parts of themselves prior to applying, just as they'd be required to hold all educational qualifications noted in the recruitment brochures. Don't conform, don't get in...
(I realise I'll be written off as a miserable old git. )
I don't favor tattoos at all because it seems unmilitary to me, but it's simply a cultural issue, and if the culture evolves to accept tattoos, then a tattoo restriction serves no material purpose. Once the restriction is removed, having a tattoo does not violate regulations, does not amount to a lack of discipline, and is not nonconforming. It only violates my personal sense of taste.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2023, 22:39
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,908 Likes on 1,247 Posts
Put it this way, 13 years ago U.K. military personnel awarded medals, the first marine has a visible neck tattoo, so nothing new.



NutLoose is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2023, 09:02
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 523
Received 20 Likes on 14 Posts
Awful. The downward trend prevails. Tattoos are a badge of office and the office is full of working class gits and non-officer types. Well, so my Dad thought (ex Colonel) and as I ventured through life, it appeared to be the case. Loved that scene in "Officer " Gentleman" where Richard Geer made frantic attempts to cover up his hideous arm tattoo when under scrutiny of the fearsome Drill Sergeant..

Apart from all that, they are a real distraction. Immagine a Senior Office facing you off with a izard tattoo snaking it's way out of his collar towards his left ear0le !

Selection Officers faced with people who feel that they must display unity to a certain mind-set must surely loose interest rapidly.

Blimey. What ever next ?

Gordomac is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 11th Mar 2023, 10:47
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by Gordomac
Blimey. What ever next ?
Obvious, Make Up for the "Real Man". Other variants; take your choice!
superplum is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2023, 11:52
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,908 Likes on 1,247 Posts
And earrings.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2023, 13:10
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 366
Received 161 Likes on 50 Posts
In a moment of mid-life madness I recently got a nipple ring.

Hurts like hell, but I always know where my car keys are.
DuncanDoenitz is online now  
The following 2 users liked this post by DuncanDoenitz:
Old 11th Mar 2023, 13:25
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,460
Received 363 Likes on 212 Posts
"So following that logic, why not bin the dress regs completely then? Only wear uniforms when on parades or when in fighting mode, so just wear civvies; have your hair as long as or in whatever fashion you like; have as many earrings and tatts as you like? So I can grow a full set of face fuzz but can't grow sideburns to the bottom of my ears?"

yes well -your opponents probably dress that way - certainly in many recent conflicts - and it doesn't seem to affect their ability to fight.

A smart uniform really went out at the end of the 19th Century - once camouflage came in. The rest is really dressing up on high days and holy days.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2023, 20:59
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Lost
Posts: 387
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Wyntor
Driver airframe will still need L & R on the gloves though.
I still have my gloves with R & L on them. As applied by my Nav Captain.
Dunhovrin is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2023, 05:02
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Who is going to decide what is an obnoxious tattoo, what about naked ladies, what words can be in a tattoo, if it’s morally/culture insensitive, etc., etc., etc.
I think we are wandering into a minefield with blinders on.
fltlt is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2023, 05:09
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,959
Received 148 Likes on 89 Posts
With mixed emotions I watch the struggles of people subsequently needing/trying (often unsuccessfully) to remove redesign their tattoos in later life.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2023, 06:31
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SAUDI
Posts: 462
Received 13 Likes on 9 Posts
All interesting comments. The one on clothes and other items of appearance has been posted. The issue now is what tattoos are acceptable. Just like what clothes are acceptable. If one is joining up, then one accepts the requirements the Defence Force. Admittedly the reason that tattoos have become acceptable is it is far more prominent in society then it has ever been and if your recruiting numbers are down then some of the restrictions have to be lifted.
finestkind is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2023, 14:55
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,752
Received 155 Likes on 78 Posts
Once, years ago, we met some fellows who were supposedly trained and prepared to operate “Covert” …geez they luved that term.
They had grown their hair long, sported ferocious beards and talked of sporting “colourful native garb” in order to blend in.
We asked them how their patriotic flag and unit tattoos amongst many others were going to go over with the enemy when they saw them.
They didn’t laugh.
We found it strange that they would be loudly discussing this at “Happy Hour” in a crowded hotel bar in Dubai.
albatross is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2023, 15:18
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,035
Received 2,908 Likes on 1,247 Posts
A lot of my ex RN friends from home got “Made in Carlisle” tattooed around their belly buttons which looked cool
NutLoose is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.