A 48 hour waiting period for tattoos?

"Aesthetics are not our concern. If an adult understands, and it's clear that they understand, go do it! You or I may not like it, but the last time I checked this is America!!! Someone who understands what he or she is doing is free to do it."

– Carl Goodman, Marblehead Board of Health

The story on the right by Alan Burke appeared in last Friday’s (October 3, 2003) edition of The Salem News in Salem, Mass. Local legislators recently passed regulation instituting a 48 hour waiting period for almost all tattoos and piercings. At first glance, it’s a fascinating concept — kind of an enforced “are you really sure you want this tattoo?” BME caught up with the chairman of the Marblehead Board of Health, Carl Goodman, and talked to him about this unusual legislation and what motivated it.

BME: This is probably the first time in the country any such legislation has been instituted — what made you decide to do it? What was the motivation?

Goodman: The State had alerted boards of health that we were authorized to regulate and that the State was, again, leaving it to local boards to deal with these issues. I believe it was through the Department of Health that they made some model regulations available for local boards to work with. We looked at it and recognized this is becoming an increasingly common practice and therefore we really needed to address it from a public health perspective. If practitioners chose to operate in Marblehead we wanted to ensure that public health was protected.

BME: I don’t understand though how the 48 hours does that. You’re quoted as saying that it’ll reduce the number of drunks getting tattoos, but what’s to stop someone from being drunk again 48 hours later?

Goodman: They certainly can, but at least there’s an opportunity for someone to go “wait… what was I going to do?” It’s really because of the permanency and because it does involve what we consider to be a surgical procedure — and there is no medical professional in attendance. We had no one come forward from the industry when we published our public notice. Had there been someone saying, “hey, could we have an exception if we had a registered nurse in attendance who certified…”, but we didn’t have that. Given that this is a procedure where dyes are applied under the skin, it seemed reasonable to make sure that a customer would be giving clear consent that would be obtained in any medical context.

BME: Does the legislation also ban tattooing drunk people?

Goodman: Oh, absolutely!

BME: So, isn’t the 48 hour thing superfluous? I’m not entirely clear what it’s trying to stop.

Goodman: I don’t think it’s superfluous. It’s trying to assure that the regulations are complied with, that people have considered whether or not they want to have this permanent procedure performed.

BME: When they go to the tattoo studio to make their appointment, does the tattoo studio have any requirement to give them any paperwork — how does someone get informed about the risks?

Goodman: There’s detailed information that the practitioners will be required to give. The regulations provide that the Board of Health will develop the form for consent and notice and so on. Within the regs we’ve listed a number of issues, most of which come out of the model regs — the basic surgical risks, as well as the permanency, and so on. We’ll have all of that available, and those kinds of notices can be amended from time to time by the board so that if issues come up we’ll be able to deal with them and revise as needed.

This notice will have to be sent to the Health Department.

BME: Are you saying that all tattoos done in Marblehead have to be registered with the government?

Goodman: Notice of the tattoo, yes, but not what the specific tattoo is.

BME: The notice will include their name and identification? And it will have to be filed with the government, not just kept on record by the studio?

Goodman: Yes, that’s correct.

BME: Hmm… You’d also said that the 48 hours gives parents a chance to step in?

Goodman: Well, yes, if you’re dealing with minors then clearly we think it’s in the minor’s best interest that the parent have the opportunity to determine whether or not this invasive procedure is acceptable.

BME: Most areas restrict tattooing to 18 and over anyway. What’s the age limit in Marblehead?

Goodman: I don’t think we set a minimum age. It’s not our place to step in and tell parents that they can or can not allow their children to do something, but it is our place to make sure that minors who are undergoing a procedure obtain parental consent. If the parent permits it, that’s an individual family decision. I don’t want to get into that role!

BME: Will parents have to actually be at the studio?

Goodman: The parent must sign the consent forms. As in any other situation where parental consent is required, the proprietor of the establishment will have to determine that consent has been legitimately obtained. We don’t specify the parent has to be there, but in any situation where you need to confirm consent, you want to be sure you’ve actually got it!

BME: You’re quoted as saying there will be severe penalties for violating this 48 hour ban. What are the penalties?

Goodman: In this case it can be up to loss of license. Alternately, suspension of license or fines. If they continue working without a license, prosecution would follow which would be up to town council. The first thing that would happen is an application for a cease and desist order from the courts.

BME: Does this waiting period apply to all piercings as well?

Goodman: There’s an exception in there for single ear piercings with disposable one-time-use tools, for the jeweler that has the sleepers or the gun that does a single pierce…

BME: Does that mean if a person did an ear piercing with a needle there would be a 48 hour waiting period?

Goodman: No. Many places will do what’s called a “single pierce” where the entire instrument is disposed of. The routine, traditional ear piercing is excluded, as well as anything of this nature performed by a licensed physician. If you want to have a whole series of holes in the ear, and a physician is going to do that for you, our regulations don’t apply.

BME: I know that it doesn’t currently have a tattoo studio, but how big is Marblehead?

Goodman: Marblehead is four square miles with a population under twenty-five thousand. It’s geographically not a location where there’s a high probability that someone would want to practice this art, but as a board of health we wanted to be sure that if someone comes to town that he or she is dealing with the public in a proper way that protects the public health.

Our role — our obligation — is to protect public health, and that’s what we try to do here. But we haven’t had any bodyart applications for license yet, so I’m not sure that it will ever come up!

BME: Finally, what did you mean when you said that people having metal objects protrude from themselves wasn’t a public health issue?

Goodman: The aesthetics are not a public health issue is what I meant. Whether or not I personally like a particular kind of body art — the aesthetic issue — has nothing to do with public health. I personally may have some opinion, but that doesn’t enter into the public health issue. The public health issue is the conditions under which this is done, that it’s sanitary, that the practitioner has a certain level of competence, and that the individuals undergoing the procedure are aware and understand the surgical risks and other attendant risks associated with the procedure.

Aesthetics are not our concern. If an adult understands, and it’s clear that they understand, go do it! You or I may not like it, but the last time I checked this is America!!! Someone who understands what he or she is doing is free to do it.

This is Marblehead. We believe in independence.

So there you have it, straight from the source. Personally I wish everyone would self-impose a 48 hour waiting period (at least) on any such decision, but I’m not entirely sure that I’m comfortable being forced by the government to do so, let alone filing my name with them when I do so. At the same time, we all know that many tattoo studios, especially the less established or lower-end ones survive off of “walk-in” appointments where a person wanders in off the street and leaves with a tattoo an hour or two later. How eliminating this sector will affect the business is difficult to predict, but given the permanence of tattoos, one has to ask oneself whether it is ethical to tattoo a person that wouldn’t want that tattoo 48 hours later.

Goodman was very clear that these regulations are up for revision, and that he understand that not everyone sees the posted legal notices. Anyone, especially those in the area, are always welcome to visit or contact the Board of Health (at 781-631-0212) and discuss the issues, and they are willing to work with studios (should they ever open in Marblehead) to fine-tune these regulations to serve the public good.

We should also look at some important nuances in both Goodman’s statements, and in the regulations themselves. Other than the waiting period, one of the things that sets Marblehead’s regulations apart is the empowerment of parents. A majority of areas are restricting tattooing to 18 and over, regardless of the parent’s wishes — Marblehead leaves that power in the right place (the individual or their guardian), whereas too many governments have seized it for themselves. In addition, Goodman, who personally does not like tattoos or piercings — going so far as to avoid shopping at stores where he’s going to have to come in contact with it — still stands vehemently behind the credo of “I may not like what you’re doing, but I support your right to do it” (in 48 hours that is).

Correction: Mr. Goodman wrote us to clarify, “while you are right that I am personnaly not a fan of body art, the Evening News while generally correct, at least in
substance, on its quotes, did not correctly quote me in the last paragraph. What I said in response to Mr. Burke’s question about seeing people with multiple facial piercings was that I know some people try to avoid shopping in certain establsihments …. I actually wouldn’t modify my shopping patterns because of a clerk’s appearance, although I certainly have would because of a clerk’s attitutde!”

In addition it should be noted that State law in Mass bans anyone under the age of 18 from being tattooed, so Marblehead’s lack of legislation in that area does not mean that minors are permitted, even with parental consent.

BME will continue to follow this story — if similar regulations are passed in your area, let us know!

Shannon Larratt
BMEzine.com

20 KANJIS: Does your kanji tattoo mean what you think it does?

Every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the linguistic tradition into which he has been born - the beneficiary inasmuch as language gives access to the accumulated records of other people's experience, the victim in so far as it confirms him in the belief that reduced awareness is the only awareness and as it bedevils his sense of reality, so that he is all too apt to take his concepts for data, his words for actual things.

– Aldous Huxley

I hear people say all the time that the sheets of kanji (“Japanese writing”) that you see in tattoo studios aren’t accurate… that your tattoo of “beautiful soul” more likely actually means something along the lines of “very good sushi”. With the aid of Dita, webmaster of BMEJapan.com, I chose twenty random tattoos from the BME galleries and asked her what they actually meant.

Tattoo	Meaning
	They say it means: “To be different” Actual meaning: “Difference” — the tense isn’t quite right, but it’s close at least — difference and different are pretty similar.

They say it means: “Within the depths of sorrow, there is joy”

They say it means: “Extreme change”

They say it means: “Taurus”

They say it means: “Modified Soul”

They say it means: “Without a friend in the world”

They say it means: “Stylish”

They say it means: “Depression”

They say it means: “Drunk”

They say it means: “Soulmates”

They say it means: “I’m a stupid round-eye”

They say it means: “Pistol”

They say it means: “Naughty girl”

They say it means: “Enlightenment”

They say it means: “To thine own self be true”

They say it means: “Mike”

They say it means: “Sworn brothers”

They say it means: “Independent woman”

They say it means: “Winter blizzard”

It’s important to also add that kanji characters gain a lot of their meaning from context (that is, how they’re used, what letters they’re around, and so on). Because of that, it’s difficult to accurately translate single-character kanjis because they don’t have a context.

In any case, yes, I realize this is the most “fluff” piece I have ever written, but I hope you enjoyed it. I suppose I could go on with explanations of how to find kanji meanings and so on, but it should be obvious: learn to read and write Japanese!

Personally I wouldn’t get something that I didn’t understand first hand tattooed on me, but if you decide to go for kanji and don’t read it yourself, at least do yourself the favor of asking someone you trust for help.

Sincerely,

Shannon Larratt
BMEzine.com

Robert Dill and his Anti-American Mission

Be not intimidated... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice.

– John Adams, 1765

Jodi Faltin, a fourteen year old grade nine student was recently suspended from school in Blairsville RD because of her eyebrow ring. Her parents went to the school board and stressed that she was a bright student and that they, as her parents, felt that she should be allowed to wear the ring if she wanted to. The school board didn’t budge, and she remains suspended as long as she wears the eyebrow ring.

Tattooed = Slutty?

In advertising, sex sells... But only if you're selling sex.

– Jef I. Richards

A number of readers recently brought to my attention an opinion piece, “TATTOO MAMAS” by Michael Smerconish published in the Philadelphia Daily News, in which he says that at a bar he’d be more likely to hit on a tattooed woman because, to simplify his arguments, “tattooed chicks are sluts and he’s more likely to get some”. Now, even a cursory understanding of tattooed women makes it clear that his argument is bunk — it’s a common misconception by people with a shallow understanding of tattoo culture. But what I think it taps into is an intuition that tattooed women (and men) are hot and desirable. Because of that, some individuals attempting to promote the idea that they are sexually available will “advertise” with one or two small tattoos, generally at the base of the back or on the hip or pubic region — to generalize, have you ever notice that the most promiscuous tattooed women tend to be those with the least tattoos?

L-R: PiercedPuff (photo: Francis Hills), Rachel (photo: Lee Higgs), FREE, Dunebug, and Princess Anna.
All modified and beautiful — not beauty because of their tattoos, but beauty expressed through their tattoos.

Everyone unavoidably advertises themselves sexually by their appearance — makeup, hairstyles, and choice of clothing being the most obvious examples, but body modifications play exactly the same role. However, there are two fundamental differences between the techniques. First, body modification is of course permanent, whereas fashion can be changed from day to day. That brings us to the second difference, which is that body modification uses the person themselves to advertise, whereas fashion is just a cover — more like holding up a sign or an obviously mocked-up photo, and I think that’s what makes people so drawn to tattooed individuals. A fashion victim holds up a sign that says “I’m sexually attractive”, whereas the modified individual, without any sign at all, is sexy.

In modern society we live in a world of lies — advertisers sell us products based on thirty seconds of deception, hiding that cigarettes will kill us, burgers and soft drinks will make us obese, and this car is better than that car. Governments sell us wars based on even larger lies, masking their greedy corporate sponsors in tall tales we all know are false — we know they’re untrue, and we hate them, but truth is so rare it almost seems unobtainable. As a society, we are desperate for something “real”, something we can confirm is not a lie, and something we know the person speaking to us actually believes. Tattoos offer that with their proof of commitment.

If a person gets all dolled up in their makeup and designer clothes, and goes out on the town to attract a mate, they’re not actually doing so on basis of who they are — they are doing so on the basis of how well they can disguise who they are and how well they can pretend to be something they may not be. They are competing to see who the best liar is. Who you actually wake up to, once the disguise is lifted, is a secondary issue, when in fact it should be the only issue. Tattooing of course is still a disguise, but it’s a disguise you can never take off. When a person chooses to present their identity using permanent body modification, they are inexorably changing who they are. They are becoming the ideal illusion, thereby making the illusion real.

That is, a modified individual, who goes into the procedures with a clear head and a clear goal, is able to rebirth themselves in what they perceive their best is. They become their own fantasy. Someone in fancy clothes simply pretends to be that way for a little while — they don’t actually become anything.

On the other hand, the modified individual who goes into the procedures without a clear head, or worse yet, a sense of self-hatred or poor self-esteem, potentially forever mars themselves by having created a less than ideal individual. That doesn’t mean they can’t reinvent and redeem themselves subsequently, but body modification brings mistakes that are permanent — leaving the person to build beauty on top of flaws. Of course, many people believe that true beauty is only achieved through the combination of a minor imperfection on unmarred beauty. We all know that it’s the small scar on the lip of a beautiful woman that makes her truly stunning… but that’s another subject that could cover an entire column.

In addition, as the world embraces tattooed women and men as beautiful in the mainstream sense of the word, it encourages a culture that values individual expression and unique beauty over a mass manufactured and “uniform”-based code of fashion that imprisons us. In a way, pornography has always been an indicator of the future; it is not only the first to embrace new technology, but the cultural sensibilities seen in porn almost always come to be accepted by the mainstream a decade later. BME/HARD of course exists far outside that world, but the explosive success of sites like Suicide Girls showcases the public’s desire to embrace a new and more “real” standard of Eros.

Above photos courtesy of SuicideGirls.com

A widespread taste for pornography means that nature is alerting us to some threat of extinction.

– J.G. Ballard

My point though is that fashion is transient — the ability to excel at it simply implies the ability to lie well. In a world full of lies — lies begetting unimaginable pain — this is not what the world wants any more. The world wants and needs fashion that actually represents the individual in a permanent and intranssient sense. Body modification represents that need, and it is for this reason that tattooed women and men are far more beautiful than those without.

So are tattooed women slutty by default? Of course not — but they sure are hot.

Sincerely,

Shannon Larratt
BME.com

Fighting Unfair Employment Practices

"When people go to work, they shouldn't have to leave their hearts at home."

– Betty Bender

In my previous column I talked a bit about how employers can benefit from hiring the modified. Unfortunately, most employers are still too clueless to realize that, and it’s all too common to see people fired (or simply not hired) over body piercings.

Recently I had the opportunity to interview Vickie, a 23-year old single mother who was fired from a major health food chain over her facial piercings. After being fired, even though there were no rules against body piercing when she was hired, she was denied unemployment insurance as they said she’d violated a “reasonable” rule. We caught up with her in Santa Rosa, California.

BME: Tell me a bit about your body modifications.

Vickie: I have several body mods including eleven piercings. My body modifications are one of the most important parts of my life. It’s hard to put into words what they mean to me, but I would not be complete without them. They are so much more than a “fashion statement”. They are a part of me and it is as if they had been there all along. I would never remove them for anyone.

BME: When *** *** Market hired you, did you have these piercings?

Vickie: When I was hired in the prepared foods department, my labret, tongue, and lobes were all visible.

BME: What gauge were your ears?

Vickie: At the time my lobes were 2 ga.

BME: And the store was fine with it?

Vickie: I had assumed the piercings were fine because I had been interviewed and hired with them in. Three months into working there I was told by my manager that I had to remove my labret because it was against store policy. I of course refused. I reminded the store manager I’d been hired with it and had been working there with it for three months and he agreed to add the labret piercing into the store policy as an “allowable piercing.” So after that everything was fine.

BME: So how did the problem come about?

Vickie: I kept working this job until March 2002 when I had found another one which I took. A few days later I changed my labret to a vertical labret and got double nostril piercings. However, I didn’t like my new job and wanted to come back to the old one. I called my old department manager asked for my old job back, and she of course agreed to re-hire me. I went back with my new piercings, signed the papers, and returned to work. I was given the employee’s guide which I signed certification that I had received — no where in it does it address body piercing.

After two and a half months of working there I was sent to the store manager’s office to get some tape. When I was in the office my store manager asked me how long I’d had these “piercings in my face.” I told him I’d had them for the entire time I’d worked there, and he responded that it was not acceptable for me to have these facial piercings and that I should remove them. I told him that wasn’t fair and I shouldn’t have to remove them, grabbed the tape, and went back down to my department.

BME: Before we continue, let me ask you if you were actually dealing with the public in your job?

Vickie: I was dealing with the public on a daily basis. Customer service was the main aspect of my job.

BME: And did they have any problems with your piercings?

Vickie: Most customers didn’t say anything about my piercings. If they did, it was always something positive. They would say things like “wow, that really looks good on you”, or “I’ve never seen that done before, I really like that.”

Anyway, a few minutes later, the store manager came back down and told me to get in his office now. When I got there he there told me I was trying to take advantage of the company and was going to get him fired. He was screaming at me and I began to cry. I didn’t know how to explain to him how much my mods mean to me. He would never understand.

He then told me if I didn’t remove the jewelry he would have to fire me. I replied, “I guess you’ll have to fire me because you are not being fair and I am not going to remove my piercings.” After that he went out of the office, came back with firing papers, signed them, and told me to get out. So I got my stuff and left.

BME: Were you the only person with piercings at that entire store?

Vickie: There were other people in my department with facial piercings — who might I add are still working there. Two people had nostril piercings, another had a labret, and another had a labret and a nostril piercing. I really don’t know why I was singled out. I don’t know if maybe the store manager was in a bad mood or something. I had never been written up before, so I know it wasn’t because of poor work.

BME: And it’s not as if there was a real “store policy”… The guy just made it up?

Vickie: If there was a store policy I never received anything in writing and it wasn’t in the employee’s guide. Nothing about it was ever posted to my knowledge.

BME: So what did you do?

Vickie: The next week I filed for unemployment, and a few weeks later I got a letter stating that I was denied because I broke a “reasonable” rule concerning dress code.

BME: How could they say that?

Vickie: I think they just said that because they didn’t have all the facts. I guess to them having body piercings is breaking dress code, but I don’t believe they had a copy of any store rules when they made that statement. I absolutely flipped out and immediately filed an appeal. They then sent me a letter with a date to appear in court. It took about four months from the date I was fired until the date of the hearing. I almost gave up a few times because of how lengthy the process was but I know I couldn’t let them get away with firing me.

On the court date I appeared before the judge and stated my side of the story. She told me I would receive the verdict in the mail. A few weeks later I got it and this is what it said,

"Had the claimant been informed at the time of hire that the employer would not hire her if she had more than one facial piercing, it is arguable that her decision to obtain such piercings would have breached the contract of employment and violated a reasonable employer rule.

In this case, however, the claimant was hired with these piercings in place and worked for two and one-half months without the team leader's comment, despite the fact that he had multiple opportunities to observe her appearance. Under such circumstances, it is found that even if the store policies did exist at the time the claimant was rehired, the employer has failed in its duty to provided sufficient evidence to establish that this infringement on the claimant's First Amendment right of self-expression is outweighed by the enhancement of the employer's business. It follows that the discharge was for reasons not constituting misconduct, within the meaning of section 1256 of the Unemployment Insurance Code.

The Department determination and ruling under code 1256 are reversed. The claimant qualifies for benefits."

BME: Wow! That’s awesome. Any advice for people in the same situation as you?

Vickie: If anyone finds themselves in a similar situation don’t back down. Stand up for your rights. Go through all the steps to get what you deserve. Nobody has the right to tell you what you can do to your body — it is yours. If you feel as strongly as I do about your mods, don’t give them up for anyone.

And if you’re shopping at a place that claims to be a “diverse company”, realize that in reality it may not be.

BME: Thanks for talking to us, and good luck finding a more tolerant job.

So there you have it! Sometimes the system does work, and perhaps body modification that doesn’t damage one’s work performance actually is protected. It may not seem like much, but this judge’s ruling could be an important small step towards fair treatment of modified individuals.

Good luck, and keep standing up for yourself,

Shannon Larratt
BME.com