Things have changed, depending on who you ask. A 2015 poll of 2,225 U.S. adults found that 47% of Millennials has at least one tattoo, and out of those, 69% have two or more (Shannon-Missal, 2016). Some of the highest earning celebrities, athletes, business executives and public figures sport tattoos: Rhianna, Lebron James, Jill Abramson (former executive editor of the New York Times), Caroline Kennedy, and even 26th President Teddy Roosevelt. Mainstream retailers, like Urban Outfitters, American Eagle, Target and Kohl’s hock temporary tattoo kits for “adults” that hit a nerve with the rising popularity of Coachella-esque festival wear. It misses the nerve of the true pain and permanence of an actual tattoo, but these items are popular sellers nonetheless.
Yet, the positive numbers don’t clear the social stigma hanging in the air for those seven in ten young adults who have two or more tattoos. Most still keep ink covered in public or professional situations, according to NPR journalist Allan GreenBlatt (2014). Perhaps there is good reason for the long sleeves and hesitation. The same 2015 poll found that 47% of those U.S. adults questioned perceived tattooed individuals to be less attractive, compared to those without, and 34% even found them less respectable (Shannon-Missal, 2016).
A paradox arises: more people in the U.S. have at least one tattoo, but describe individuals with tattoos negatively. This is the foundation for stigmatization. It’s the foundation for discrimination. The phenomenon has been well-studied in other groups, such as among those with mental illness, and findings are that individuals who experience instances of discrimination, internalize the feeling of stigma and even anticipate being treated discriminately in future situations (Quinn, Williams & Weisz, 2015). It can be reasonably assumed that the recent college graduate applying to the top law firm, or the 30-something dad going into divorce court, are diligently covering their tattoos because in anticipation of stigma; not out of shame or concealment for their true identity. For employers, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discriminatory hiring based on sex, race, color, national origin, and religion. Many employers choose to take a very literal interpretation of the law’s language, and just justify the creation of stringent tattoo policies by considering them unprotected under this act.
All hope is not lost, and if positive trends continue it is likely that public and professional actions may eventually live up to their professed opinions of acceptance for tattooed individuals. The U.S. Army, T-Mobile and Starbucks have all lifted, or retooled, their policies on visible tattoos for employees. Heavily tattooed senior executive lawyer at Boston’s Inverness Medical Innovations Inc., Paul Hempel, when interviewed by The Wall Street Journal, said, “people think it's kind of cool to have a senior executive of counsel who's a little bit on the edge.” (Org, 2003). Unfortunately, until all employers share the sentiment, “cool” is not enough. Second thoughts to the intelligence and qualifications of the applicant should be made before passing over interviewees based on the colors of their skin.
