However Broussard says that even when individuals have tattoos themselves, they will maintain damaging views on the topic. “Individuals are likely to internalise stigma. It doesn’t actually matter if in case you have that id or you’ve got that attribute like proudly owning a tattoo. If there’s a really robust societal stigma in opposition to it, you’ll internalise it and nonetheless imagine it. It’s this perspective that it’s OK for me, however not for them,” she explains.
‘Scale of acceptability’
So even if you happen to’re a CEO with a tattoo you won’t rent somebody who has one. Johnny C Taylor Jr, president and CEO on the US-based Society for Human Useful resource Administration, which represents round 300,000 HR professionals globally, says there’s a sliding scale of acceptability in the case of tattoos.
“When it comes to most acceptable to least acceptable, if you happen to can cover it, it’s OK. Then there’s the employers who say you may have a tattoo, however it shouldn’t be a distraction; it covers half your face or is one thing that may offend different individuals, like a scantily-clad girl on the biceps of a person. Lastly, there’s the class of simply not acceptable, and that sometimes means when tattoos present up in your face and it’s one thing that nobody can keep away from taking a look at, [or] when the character is really controversial, a swastika for instance.
“Extra conservative industries, for instance monetary companies, banking and healthcare, are going to be extra conservative in the case of tattoos,” Taylor provides. “We discover much more liberal insurance policies in leisure, even in company leisure the place individuals on the most senior ranges might need a visual tattoo. These people would by no means try this in the event that they have been senior executives at a financial institution.”
