TATTOOS

#1
i dont know if anyone on here has been watching warship, but they have been reporting on 42 commando(i think) travelling to brunei(i think) for jungle training.

anyway they had a scene with a marine ( someone with rank) possibly PTI. he had numerous tattoos, including a massive C on his neck, behind his ear.

i just wondered, that he must have got it done once in the corps?

surely he would get a right b0ll0cking?
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#2
It depends when the tattoo was inflicted, the rules have changed more recently & those that joined with tattoos or were serving & had tattoos before the rule change can hardly be retrospectively bollocked.

For the purists the following advice for those yet to join, the application guidance notes (AFCO Form 5 dated August 2009) state:

12. Tattoos

Tattoos that are offensive, obscene or excessive in size or number will be a bar to entry or re-entry. Tattoos that are visible on the head, neck and hand when in parade uniform are a bar to entry. If you have any you will be asked to complete a form describing your tattoos. They will be seen during your medical examination.
The Recruiting Bible, (BR 3, Naval Personnel Management, dated May 2009,) states:

Tattoos.

a. Individuals applying for entry into the Naval Service are to be rejected if they have any tattoo, whether visible or not, which is obscene or offensive (e.g racist, antireligious, crude, overtly sexist, drugs related or of an extreme political nature).

The AFCO Medical Examiner is to bring to the attention of Careers Staff any applicant with a tattoo, which is considered unacceptable. The interpretation of whether a tattoo is offensive, or not, is an executive function. It is not the responsibility of the AFCO(ME) to make such a decision but instead he/she is to highlight the existence and description of any tattoos to the recruiter who is empowered to make a judgement as to whether it is offensive.

If there is doubt, advice should be sought using the normal command chain may be consulted if there remains doubt.

Candidates are issued with a tattoo proforma in order to identify any tattoos, and which is to be signed prior to entry, to state that there have been no changes since the AFCO ME.

b. Tattoos which are visible in "parade" uniform e.g. on the face, neck, ears, hands and wrists are not permitted and are a bar to entry. Advice is sought from Captain Naval Recruiting in cases of doubt.

c. The Naval Service, as a disciplined service, requires an individual's bearing to be neat, discreet and have a restrained personal appearance when in uniform.
The latest relevant Instruction Dated 10 Mar 2008, states:

GUIDANCE ON TATTOOS

1. Following a Fleet-led review into the Service policy on tattoos, the guidance given at the Reference has now been modified.

TATTOOS ON FACES NECK WRISTS AND HANDS

2. Candidates with tattoos on neck, face, ears, wrists, hands and fingers, ie visible when in ‘parade uniform’, are not eligible to enter the Naval Service. This is unchanged. However, whereas previously, there was an element of discretion whereby very small tattoos on hands, wrists and fingers could be waived by Captain Naval Recruiting, this discretion has now been removed. This includes any religious or cultural tattoos.
 
#3
Ninja_Stoker said:
a. Individuals applying for entry into the Naval Service are to be rejected if they have any tattoo, whether visible or not, which is obscene or offensive (e.g racist, antireligious, crude, overtly sexist, drugs related or of an extreme political nature).
Uh-oh. If my AFCO and the medical examiner have seen my tattoo and haven't mentioned it, can I assume there's no problem with it or is there always the off-chance I could get booted out of Raleigh if the officers there don't like it?

The Darwin fish is an ichthys symbol with "evolved" legs and feet attached and often with the word Darwin inside (like the ΙΧΘΥΣ or Jesus found in some Christian versions). It symbolizes the scientific theory of evolution, for which Charles Darwin laid the foundation, in contrast with Creationism, which is often associated with Christianity.
Origin

In 1983, two friends involved in the southern California atheist and freethought movements, Al Seckel and John Edwards, co-created the Darwin fish design, which was first used on a freethought leaflet for Atheists United in 1984.
If anyone's interested.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#4
The irony is that in many cases, although a symbol maybe significant & well known to the person sporting the tattoo, it may well be the case that nobody else has a Scooby on the subject through ignorance or indifference or both.

If it depicted something nasty about the Pope or said something in plain English, then maybe something may have been said.

That said, an athiest tattoo is sure to draw long & 'interesting' theological discussions with ordained service personnel. Well done. :wink:
 
#5
Ninja_Stoker said:
The irony is that in many cases, although a symbol maybe significant & well known to the person sporting the tattoo, it may well be the case that nobody else has a Scooby on the subject through ignorance or indifference or both.

If it depicted something nasty about the Pope or said something in plain English, then maybe something may have been said.

That said, an athiest tattoo is sure to draw long & 'interesting' theological discussions with ordained service personnel. Well done. :wink:
Consider it covered up. I'll book an appoitment to get it done before my RNAC :oops:
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#6
Seriously, for a pico-second:

The Armed Forces neither recommend nor endorse the surgical removal of tattoos to individuals who have yet to join the service.

Back to "normal" mode:

If it wasn't picked-up by anyone & was recorded on the AFCO tattoo proforma, then that basically legitimises the tattoo.
 
#7
Ninja_Stoker said:
Seriously, for a pico-second:

The Armed Forces neither recommend nor endorse the surgical removal of tattoos to individuals who have yet to join the service.

Back to "normal" mode:

If it wasn't picked-up by anyone & was recorded on the AFCO tattoo proforma, then that basically legitimises the tattoo.
Wasn't going to get it removed, just covered up with a non-offensive tattoo. A butterfly perhaps!

When you say "basically", does that mean I could get kicked out of training until A)It's gone or B)It's covered up?

I don't want to have put in all that time and effort into the selection only to be told I can't start training because of a 1"x3" blob on my leg.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#8
Zoidberg said:
When you say "basically", does that mean I could get kicked out of training until A)It's gone or B)It's covered up?

I don't want to have put in all that time and effort into the selection only to be told I can't start training because of a 1"x3" blob on my leg.
Yep, after joining the following rules apply:

Further Guidance on Tattoos

Service personnel must project the Service in a positive light and not to bring the Service into disrepute. Like any other UK employer whose uniformed personnel are expected to maintain public confidence, the Service sets policy on the appearance in uniform of its men and women, and this includes the nature, extent and location of tattoos.

Tattoos which are visible when No 1 uniform (RM Blues) is being worn, whether because they extend beyond the collar or cuff, or because they are being worn on the face, neck or hands, are not acceptable, are contrary to current regulations and must not be acquired. (Naval Officer and Senior Rate tropical No1 uniform do expose forearms and lower upper arms. Regulations permit the exposure of tattoos in these areas, provided they conform to the rules governing all tattoos wherever they may be.)

Tattoos are not acceptable if they are judged by the Commanding Officer, or at the recruiting stage the Recruiting Officer, to be reasonably likely to:

a. Undermine the authority or dignity of the Service or bring discredit to the Service.
b. Offend others or invite provocation, for example because they are obscene, lewd, crude, racist, sexist, homophobic, or intimidating.
c. Affect the employability of the wearer, for example by making it unacceptable for that person to parade or stand guard in public, or, depending on Branch/Specialisation and career profile, to engage on special operations.

In addition, visible tattoos must not be garish or numerous or particularly prominent (which will depend on its size and location). Commanding Officers may order personnel with tattoos which contravene the provisions above, but which are not visible in No1 uniform, to cover them up.

Service Personnel acquiring tattoos which contravene the Service policy will be invited to have their tattoos removed at their own expense. Acquisition of tattoos in contravention of the regulations and policy will result in disciplinary action and subsequent failure to remove tattoos is most likely to result in administrative discharge after an appropriate period on warning
 
#9
Zoid - Whilst I'm sure Ninja will be able to answer in a slightly more informed manner...

Do you really think a Darwinist tattoo could be considered Anti-religious? That's tenuous at best. As far as I'm aware Macro / Micro evolution isn't really hot topic in any of the Christian denominations (stand by to be corrected though...) these days. Talk about looking for problems!

Ninja - I have a rose with an arrow through it on my arm. Do you think I will offend any budding (ha ha) horticulturalists? And the arrow has blood drawn on the end of it - do you think this will be ok, what with the blood drive and the winter months looming?
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#10
To be honest, if a tattoo is going to pose a problem the wearer is usually already aware of the possibility before they even step into an AFCO. The vast majority of tattoos are acceptable with regard location & content.
 
#11
Zoidberg said:
When you say "basically", does that mean I could get kicked out of training until A)It's gone or B)It's covered up?

I don't want to have put in all that time and effort into the selection only to be told I can't start training because of a 1"x3" blob on my leg.
One might suggest that all this angst is just a teensy bit self-absorbed.

In the same way that anyone elses religious beliefs are their own affair, so are yours. If you want to make an issue of them, then that's up to you, but it won't be the tattoo that's the issue.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#14
gazwxm said:
I have a tattoo of a british bulldog with a union jack on my upper arm. Would this tattoo stop me from joining the navy?

Thanks

Gaz
It's very "last year" to be honest, an Afghan Hound would be more "with-it" darling, but we'd probably let you in if you promise to keep up.
 
#16
Yeah i know its a shit tattoo, i had it done wen i left school 7 years ago. Just one of those stupid things i did when i was younger. I am going to get it covered up soon, but i am applying shortly so was just wondering incase it stopped my application process
 

wet_blobby

War Hero
Moderator
#17
My Brother had his blood group tattooed on his arm, as you do, funny thing was it was different from mine, my mothers and my fathers.

Still, he was a Para.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#18
A mate of mine had a really naff "Homeward Bound" tattoo on his upper arm, with a picture of a matelot walking away with a kitbag on his shoulder. (Of course, we all realise this is physically impossible to lift a kitbag beyond the midriff, even when a practised snatch & grab powerlifter).

Anyway, he got a bit "tipsy" in Gib & decided to get a peacock tattoo-ed over it, as you do. Last time I saw him, 20 years later, he still has the peacock wearing a matelots' cap on his arm.
 
#19
Gen dit.
In Gib, I had my branch badge tatooed on my arm for a drunken bet with my Chief Radar. I was devastated the next morning when I remembered it.
Thing is, I branch changed a year later. Threaders. Finally got it covered about 7 or 8 years later before I went on POLC, because I was getting sick of having the p1ss ripped out of me in the swimming pool by the t1t swingers.
It was embarrasing when going on holiday with the Mrs as well. Oops.
 
#20
Alfacharlie said:
Gen dit.
In Gib, I had my branch badge tatooed on my arm for a drunken bet with my Chief Radar. I was devastated the next morning when I remembered it.
Thing is, I branch changed a year later. Threaders. Finally got it covered about 7 or 8 years later before I went on POLC, because I was getting sick of having the p1ss ripped out of me in the swimming pool by the t1t swingers.
It was embarrasing when going on holiday with the Mrs as well. Oops.
That was a good tat that, i liked it.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Tas-ape Diamond Lil's 31
H Joining Up - Royal Navy Recruiting 45
H The Quarterdeck 61

Similar threads

New Posts