BME: Body Modification Ezine

A tattooed person suspends from hooks, laying flat, one leg higher than the other. Their head is back, and they seem to be smiling, dark hair dangling like an anime character.

Celebrating body modification culture since 1994.

Author: Jordan Ginsberg

  • Employers Should Probably Start Making Peace With Tattoos

    Written by

    Jordan Ginsberg

    While it’s still absolutely a company’s prerogative whether it chooses to hire visibly modified folk, it’s becoming an increasingly poor business decision for a variety of reasons. Sure, there was a time when the conventional wisdom was that tattoos were strictly the domain of the lowest rungs on the ladder, but that’s a borderline indefensible position nowadays. Hell, when 24-percent of people in the coveted 18-50 age-range have at least one tattoo, it seems almost senseless. And apparently, human resource departments are catching on!

    At some point, a blanket no-tattoos policy will almost certainly compromise your ability to hire the talent you need, and it would appear to move against a general trend to be more tolerant of tattoos. Educational level and social status no longer predict who has body art. The young financial officer who handles your business banking may have a Celtic symbol on her ankle. The lawyer who works your case may simply take out his nose ring when he goes to court.

    As a result, many major employers have revised their tattoo policies, making them more lenient. Disney is good example. After polling the people who visit their theme parks and finding little objection, the company lifted tattoo restrictions. Faced with talent shortages, many hospitals have moved from a no tattoo policy, to a “no highly visible tattoos” stance.

    This may seem like old news — indeed, it certainly is — but it’s undeniably positive and surprisingly progressive. Of course, the trend is not as far-reaching as some would hope:

    That said, the professionals who responded to the SHRM survey made it clear that body art still leads to stereotyping. Furthermore, in a 2007 survey 85% of respondents said that tattoos and body piercings impede a person’s chances of finding a job.

    Now, as someone who often laments the fact that he was born in an era in which wearing a three-piece suit at all times isn’t quite necessary, I personally love the cognitive dissonance of seeing an impeccably dressed person with hints of tattoos peeking out from behind cuffs and collars. There should be some sort of decorum when it comes to the way one dresses for work, but I don’t think a dress code and body modification are irreconcilable, either. My favorite take on this comes from Keith Alexander, who was, among many other things, a heavily tattooed ball-breaker that flourished in marketing and advertising:

    […] the older generations [are] dying off and the younger generations [are] coming up, and the majority of them have [tattoo] work. […] So, look, we’ve reached critical mass as far as public awareness goes: Everybody knows there’s people like us and people crazier than us doing these things. So, they’re aware of it, it’s just a matter of your resumé and experience being able to back it up. I don’t think that, given the choice between a person who is somewhat qualified and not pierced or tattooed and a person who is extremely qualified and pierced and tattooed, I think that the business environment is such these days that you have to make the right choice to go for the person that’s best for the job, visible work or not.

    […]

    So it’s really … I hear so many people just whining about, “My quote-unquote mods keep me out of jobs,” and I really don’t buy into that. If you have a full facial tattoo and you got it when you were 16 and it’s shitty art, then maybe that is working against you, but I don’t have much sympathy for you. So again, I’ve never really had a problem, it’s always just a matter of setting the goal and going for it. I’ve counseled and helped so many of my friends with going through transitions like that because I’ve done it so many times, and the advice that I give them is to just pick what you want to do and go for it.

    […]

    The best thing to do is just live your life and lead by example. You know, that’s what I like to do; I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in big presentations, I’ve just given a great presentation, everyone’s just kind of blown away, and then I roll up my sleeves and people are like, “Holy shit, that’s a lot of work,” and you know, I’m totally aware of when I do it, how I do it, why I’m doing it, and so on. So you just have to set an example by the way you live your life.

    Tattoo News [CollegeRecruiter.com]
    RTFM: Keith Alexander [BMEzine.com]

  • Full Coverage: Links From All Over (Sept. 11, 2008)

    Written by

    Jordan Ginsberg


    [Military.com] If the History Channel has taught me anything (aside from providing a God’s-eye view of everything that ever happened to Hitler), it’s that the military has a proud tradition of commemorative tattoos, with each branch rather attached to its own unique iconography. In March 2007, however, the Marine Corps cracked down on and banned full-sleeve tattoos for Marine recruiters or security guards, though those with work completed before a certain date were grandfathered in. Now, a new administrative decision has extended the ban even to those who were granted an allowance:

    [The decision defines] sleeve tattoos as a large tattoo or collection of smaller tattoos that covers or almost covers a person’s arm or leg. This also includes half and quarter sleeves if they are visible in green-on-green, physical training gear. […]

    “Sleeve tattoos degrade our professional Marine image,” said Staff Sgt. Aaron McMullen, canvassing recruiter, Recruiting Substation Clarksville, Ind., Recruiting Station Louisville, Ky. “We keep our uniforms pressed, our brass shiny and our shoes polished. Sleeve tattoos don’t fit with that image.”

    Marines with tattoo sleeves who are already on recruiting will be allowed to finish their tours however, recruiters wishing to submit a career-recruiter package “may not be favorably viewed” but will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The decision will ultimately rest with the deputy commandant for manpower and reserve affairs.

    Photo credit: ESPN.com

    It’s an unfortunate decision; one would hope their contributions would be highly valued enough that a tattoo sleeve wouldn’t have to inhibit Marines’ official interaction with the public. On the other hand, decorum seems vital to the USMC, and if they won’t truck with a moo-stache, maybe this shouldn’t be a complete surprise.

    [ESPN.com] ESPN the Magazine recently put out a call for readers to send in photos of their College football-related tattoos, and at least 18 did! Nothing particularly striking, though I have to say, sports tattoos is one area in which BME is definitely lacking. I’m putting you on notice, sports fans! Start sending in photos of your tattoos. We know you’re out there.

    [ThePittsburghChannel.com] Lindsay Lohan totes got tattoos to match Samantha Ronson’s! In more exciting news, the driver on the bus I take had his hair parted to the opposite side than usual this morning.

    [Technoccult.com] OK, this is just plain awesome. I don’t know the context (or if the title, “Religious Body Piercing in India,” is in any way accurate), but this is the video to which they link — never mind the safety pins:

  • It’s Just a Lip Piercing, For God’s Sake

    Written by

    Jordan Ginsberg

    Though I think it’s usually dumb and misguided, I have a hard time taking issue with a company that institutes a dress code that prohibits visible, tasteful modifications — by all means, that sort of thing is up to the discretion of the owner. When it comes to a school board banning them, however? It often comes off as an arbitrary and thoughtless use of power. So it goes in Portales, New Mexico: 13-year-old Kierra Seales has been informed that the clear bead she wants to wear in her lip piercing is unacceptable, and that the piercing will have to come out while at school. Her mother, Nkoshe, is calling it a First Amendment issue:

    Photo credit: PNT / Mickey Winfield

    “If we could accomplish changing the wording of the dress code, both sides would benefit,” Nkoshe Seales told the board. “The students would feel like they have the freedom to express themselves, and the administration and staff would no longer have to make an issue of the fashion trend.”

    The current Portales schools’ dress code policy for piercing states that no student shall wear nose rings or nose studs or any type of visible body piercing accessory with the exception of earrings in the ear. […]

    “The First Amendment is freedom of expression. Whether youth have First Amendment rights is still a legal question, but what is not in question is that they will (have them) some day,” Nkoshe argued. “Constraining them now from expressing themselves is no preparation for exercising those rights.”

    Nkoshe has opened up a dialogue with the school board on the issue, and the board’s superintendent, Randy Fowler, seems open to reviewing the current rules and determining if a change in order. Nkoshe’s argument goes beyond a simple constitutional defense, though, and insists there are tangible benefits to body piercing:

    “Piercing is a healthy and positive thing in some people’s lives,” Nkoshe said. “It encourages personal growth and self-discovery. Body piercing is the safest and most positive (expression) a youth could embrace given the alternatives of drugs, sex and gang violence.”

    Well, I’m not sure those are the only alternatives, but … what do I know? Let’s see what the readers of the Portales News-Tribune have to say!

    I wonder what this mother would think if Portales Schools went to using school uniforms? With the large number of students now, it would be helpful to the teachers if they knew who exactly should be on campus for safety reasons. Does she think teachers should also be able to express themselves by wearing what they would like and showing what they would like?

    Hmm … well, the teacher issue seems like a bit of a straw man, but I’ll grant that if it’s a particularly problematic area, uniforms shouldn’t be discounted immediately. Even still though, aren’t piercings compatible with the institution of uniforms? One would think …

    “I hope the School Board will remain firm in the set policy. Wearing a pistol on the hip, running naked in the streets are all part of self expression however thankfully there are laws and rules. Our schools are to teach. Teaching rules is part of education. This is why children are willful today.”

    “Please change the rules for me because I am more special than all of the other kids who have gone through these schools and followed the rules. BULL!!!! I think it would be a very different circumstance if someone were to go into their place of business here in town and urinate in the floor. I think Ms. Seales would be very upset with you, and I don’t think she would be any happier if you told her that it was ok and should be allowed because you were just expressing yourself on the carpet.”

    Oh, God damn it.

    Mother protests school district policy on piercings [Portales News-Tribune]

  • Living Canvas Sold For … Wow, That’s a Lot

    Written by

    Jordan Ginsberg
    Photo credit: Paolo Foschini

    Over the course of 35 hours, Belgian artist Wim Delvoye — famous for, among other things, tattooing live pigs and just generally pissing people off — tattooed a more-than-decent image of the Virgin Mary on the back of Tim Steiner of Zurich. The tattoo was part of a larger plan, however:

    The tattoo on Tim Steiner’s back was bought last week by a German art collector for €150,000 (SFr240,000) in a deal coordinated by the Zurich gallery De Pury & Luxembourg.

    The gallery, Belgian artist Wim Delvoye and 32-year-old Steiner all took a cut of the money.

    In return Steiner is required to exhibit the work three times a year in public and private shows, the first of which will be the Asia Pacific Contemporary Art Fair in Shanghai next week.

    The sale agreement extends further, stating that after Steiner’s death the tattoo and its skin canvas will revert to the new owner, contemporary art collector Rik Reinking.

    The content and execution of the tattoo itself is largely irrelevant — indeed, the fact that it was conceived as a commodity to be profited off of was an “integral part of the work itself.” It’s an interesting concept, and while there’s a certain forward momentum in tattoo work being seen in the context of fine art, this seems to be more about making a statement about what could potentially be valued as art — the performance aspect rather than a showcase of the art itself. It’s not a bad tattoo by any means, but given the fact that it was dreamt up with profit in mind with a secondary focus on what was produced, is it all that much more than a high-brow version of Brent Moffatt’s Golden Palace advertisement?

    Zurich man Tim Steiner prepares to show off his Wim Delvoye tattoo work in China after selling it to a collector [Swissinfo]

  • BREAKING NEWS: Angry Guys Are Angry

    Written by

    Jordan Ginsberg

    OK, maybe Internet vitriol doesn’t quite count as breaking news, but when it’s as enjoyable as this, it deserves its own headline. Local hothead and 9/11 Truther Anthony Bosco really, really doesn’t like your stupid tattoos. Hates them! And by golly, he wants you to know it.

    Tattoos are nothing but a commitment towards future embarrassment and ridicule. You may think that who you are now will never change. And if you are a wilfully ignorant or narrow-minded person who will always refuse to change their perspective on the world, irrespective of how much things around you change, you may be right. At least in terms of your mental retardation, anyway. But, what you are most certainly incapable of retarding, is the inevitable physical changes to your body as you begin to age.

    And yes, I have heard all the argument before…”It’s okay if I get saggy and my tat ends up looking stupid, because I’ll be old and covered up anyway, so no-one will see it”. Really? Isn’t people seeing it the whole point of getting ink injected permanently beneath five layers of dermis? Because this excuse sounds an awful lot like an admission of the temporary relevance of whatever statement, symbol, character, etc. you have had tattooed to your body.

    He says what we’re all thinking! But wait, there’s less:

    And before anyone pulls the “But I got my children’s names tattooed across my heart because I’ll always love them” card, just hold up a minute. You can’t be serious, can you? If you need a massive tattoo across your chest, back or forearm to stand as a reminder of how much you will always love your children – then you really don’t love your children! You just want other people to think that you do. People who really and truly love their children do not need to advertise it on their flesh!

    Now, this is something with which I agree. Displays of affection for loved ones? Over it! While we’re at it, all you poseurs who hang pictures of deceased family members in your homes? Cut the crap. We know you’re just trying to trick visitors into thinking you loved Grandma. God, you are so selfish.

    Elsewhere on the Internets, Tyler F. Williams unleashes the hate for Danielle Lloyd — allegedly some sort of British pseudo-celebrity — who just recently got this transliterated Hebrew tattoo:

    (photo removed due to copyright request)
    Williams, a scholar of religion and theology, took issue with Lloyd’s facacta ink:

    Not only is the tattoo gibberish; it isn’t written in Hebrew (i.e., the language) at all! When I first looked at the pictures of the tattoo, I couldn’t figure it out. It wasn’t Biblical Hebrew. I didn’t think it was modern Hebrew. I was looking up words in my modern Hebrew dictionary and starting to think that I shouldn’t be teaching Hebrew this semester! Then I figured it out. The tattoo isn’t written in the Hebrew language, but is English written with Hebrew letters! If you transliterate the Hebrew characters into their English counterparts, voila!, you get the supposed translation: “Only God can judge me, only God can judge me.” What makes this even more silly utterly ridiculous is that the transliteration isn’t even consistent. In the first occurrence, “can” is spelled qof-nun (קן) while the second time it is spelled kaf-nun (כן). Not only doesn’t Danielle know Hebrew, she apparently doesn’t even know how to spell “can” in English! (I won’t even comment on the rest of the supposed transliteration)

    If there was a prize or award for the dumbest tattoo, this should certainly win. I just can’t believe it… this is beyond stupid.

    In all fairness, Williams’s objections are based in the fact that the tattoo is an affront to his passions and his studies. Bosco is just a dick.

    A tattoo is a permanent reminder that you are an idiot [Anthony Bosco’s Weblog]
    Danielle Lloyd: The Dumbest Hebrew Tattoo Yet! [Codex: Biblical Studies Blogspot]

Latest Tattoo, Piercing, and Body Modification News