Tattoos

[BadLuckChuck]

This new policy is bull****. I had to become a Seabee in order to go back in to the service. I know it's the Marine Corps Retirement plan but for **** sakes these Bees are ****ing nasty!

[CplKJSpevak]

This came up at the League the other night, I think It's awesome to see a Marine in his 80's with freaking forearm tattoos! We need another General Gray!

[jetdoc]

Its really odd how the Army has gone a 180 from ours...they allow dudes in with neck and or hand tattoo's, as long as they are not ganged related.

[Lucky13]

When I joined I had a Tatt on the side of my head.. All hell broke out on Parris Island when I was in that barber chair. They flipped out and about 3 weeks into bootcamp they had a talk with me offering me a free ride home and out of my contract. I declined the offer and told them I was there to become a Marine. Long story short I made it and was told I was like the 3rd Marine to ever go through Parris Island with a tatted up head. In my own humble opinion I think anyone willing to sacrifice his or her life for own life for thier country should be able to put whatever tatts they want on themselves.

[USMCGixxer6]

yup, I am grandfathered in, but told that if I get out, and try to get back in, I will not be able to because of a tattoo that travels about an inch to far up the back of my neck. WTF? I also have a half sleeve that I was planning on making a full, but hey.

[marine2023]

I wonder whatever made them come up with this anyway. I guess it's ok to take a bullet but not a needle. OOH-RAH and keep on inkin' for those who can't but someday will, again.

[CplKJSpevak]

We had a platoon picnic and invited the CO and XO (you know the political thing to do) Well, When I saw the Lt. Col. using a napkin around his can of diet soda to keep his fingers from getting cold (or wet), I thought damn! are officers getting softer? Well this tatoo policy is showing what I suspected 10 years ago! BULLSH**!

[Pete0331]

I understand what they are trying to do with this new doctrine on tattoo's but it is the wrong thing to do.
Tattoo's are a tradition in the military, more-so in the Naval Services.

Yes, I understand that tattoo's may have been construed as unprofessional, but that was 40+years ago. Now tattoo's are an accepted art-form, when done tastefully, by most members of western culture.

This will just be another way to disqualify and discourage hard charging individuals from joining the USMC.

I see it being overturned in another 6 years or so.

[Ed Palmer]

IF YOU CANT EAT IT, PHUCK IT, OR SHOOT IT,OR IF IT ISNT ISSUED TO YOU, THE MARINE CORPS SAY,S YOU DONT NEED IT,
ALSO MY TWO CENTS WORTH.
Ed,

[Alpha1Devildog]

I understand what they are trying to do with this new doctrine on tattoo's but it is the wrong thing to do.
Tattoo's are a tradition in the military, more-so in the Naval Services.

Yes, I understand that tattoo's may have been construed as unprofessional, but that was 40+years ago. Now tattoo's are an accepted art-form, when done tastefully, by most members of western culture.

This will just be another way to disqualify and discourage hard charging individuals from joining the USMC.

I see it being overturned in another 6 years or so.

Tattos are one thing...... Body art is another. God forbid that I would ever interfere with a Marine, and what he perceives as his right(s) of passage in obtaining a tatto, but where does it end, and when does it become obscene and a distraction.

I've always held to the thought, beware of the mutilation, and a lot of what's going on in the tatto parlors throughout the world is nothing more than defilement/mutilation.

Again, I would never, ever, encroach upon your right to defile your bodies any way you please, but there must be some sense of decorum, some standards to which should not be exceeded, and quite honestly, and in my humble opinion, some of what our Marines have done to their bodies is quite overboard. . . .

Never had one, never wanted one, will never get one, but you gents/Marines do what you want, just remember, there are penalties to pay for our indiscretions.

Semper Fi. . .

[CplKJSpevak]

I see it being overturned in another 6 years or so.

Hopefully with the next CMC it will change. In my opinion, They should only ban gang,sleeves and neck Tat's. But to say you can't have a Bulldog or EGA on your forearem is just stupid.

[Pete0331]

Hopefully with the next CMC it will change. In my opinion, They should only ban gang,sleeves and neck Tat's. But to say you can't have a Bulldog or EGA on your forearem is just stupid.

Gang and neck tattoo's have always been banned, even before you enter the Marines you can't have either.

It's either all or nothing. The Marines have always worked that way.
The amount of BS involved with determining wether or not a tattoo on a forearm is military related would be ridiculous.

I have no doubt in my mind that it will be changed, but not anytime soon.

[fatewineroses]

Tattos are one thing...... Body art is another. God forbid that I would ever interfere with a Marine, and what he perceives as his right(s) of passage in obtaining a tatto, but where does it end, and when does it become obscene and a distraction.

I've always held to the thought, beware of the mutilation, and a lot of what's going on in the tatto parlors throughout the world is nothing more than defilement/mutilation.

Again, I would never, ever, encroach upon your right to defile your bodies any way you please, but there must be some sense of decorum, some standards to which should not be exceeded, and quite honestly, and in my humble opinion, some of what our Marines have done to their bodies is quite overboard. . . .

Never had one, never wanted one, will never get one, but you gents/Marines do what you want, just remember, there are penalties to pay for our indiscretions.

Semper Fi. . .

You had me until you started talking about getting a tattoo being a way to "defile" our bodies. Give me a freakin' break. Tattoos go back into history hundreds of years and have consistently been a way for people to show that they have gone through a rite of passage or have completed something of import.

Being back in the "world" I understand the concerns that the officers might have about how tattoos might affect a Marine once they leave the Corps. BUT it's a Marine's choice and putting extreme restrictions on what they can do with their body is...well, I guess it's the government's way. It doesn't mean we have to like it or that it's right.

I agree with the poster who believes it will be overturned in six years. I think that this is a knee jerk reaction and it won't last.

Defilement my arse.

[Pete0331]

Being back in the "world" I understand the concerns that the officers might have about how tattoos might affect a Marine once they leave the Corps.

I don't think it has anything to do with "when/if you leave." I think a circle of Officers decided they didn't like tattoo's.

BUT it's a Marine's choice and putting extreme restrictions on what they can do with their body is...well, I guess it's the government's way. It doesn't mean we have to like it or that it's right.

Look at it this way, every rule, regulation, and policy in the Marine Corps is there to protect Marines, to make sure they maintain their proficiency, or to enforce tradition.
This tattoo regulation fits into none of the categories.

When we stopped in Singapore on my last deployment every Marine was prohibited from getting any tattoos because of the possibly of picking up a disease. That was a sound policy. It was there to protect Marines.

Now it could be seen as a PerSec issue having "moto" tats where anyone could see them. BUT if this was the case everyone wouldn't be required to have the same haircut.

[marinefrmtexas]

well the thing no one understands about the new policy is you can get forearm tattoos as long as they can not be classified as a full/quarter sleeve which simply means you cant get it around your full arm you can have USMC tattooed down your forearm and it will be acceptable but then again all the mco's are at the commands discretion