They're also very falsely implying* that without tattoos and piercings it's easy to get a job...haha.
*I know some° would argue that technically saying "don't get a tat or you won't have a job" doesn't mean "if you don't get a tat you will have a job". I know it's true, but we live in a society in which cognitive bias are definitely a thing so hammering that assertion like it's the only cause of not having a job will make people think that without tattoos they're good to go.
° I also have my suspicions about who would do that.
Lol. It’s all relative too. Once upon a time it was pretty true advice that most people wouldn’t hire you with long hair as a man. Big beards were “unprofessional” and so forth. But those things tend to be common in the roots of tech- and tech became big business and part of almost all major companies, who had to accept that they could either keep turning away the “freaks” to go make competitors rich- or they could accept them and modify their culture to make exceptions and take in the long haired geniuses who were shaping the world with their odd ways. Tattoos are much the same- once not generally something you’d see on skilled workers asides perhaps military tatoos. But nowadays tatoos are common in all walks of life and social strata.
But it’s nuanced. The tat or whatever difference you could hide has generally not been an issue- but how many folks do you see walk-in around with their faces and full necks done up? How many do you see in the upper echelons of corporations and government?
The truth is- outside of some bigots and biased hiring managers- that it all depends. In 2020 I have no doubt that a full sleeve isn’t going to cost you a data entry job or project manager or analyst etc. if you are good and desirable. But- what are the odds the person with gauges and tats and so forth who goes to work like that is making upper management or a highly public role at most companies in 2020? Slim. So wether it will cost you a job depends on the job you want and who and where you’re working, as well as how good you are at what you do.
That’s changing- and generally speaking the “bottom” changes first and faster- a tattoo or whatever likely isn’t a determining factor to get a job at the Amazon warehouse, whereas once it may have been. But the “top” executives tend to be old, and usually not big on change and open mindedness. So as younger folks who are more accepting backfill those higher positions as the older folks leave them- the acceptance trickles slowly upwards. But largely the whole thing is rooted in cultural ideas of conformity.
The suits and business wear, “don’t wear white after Labor Day” the 17 forks and knives and all that- they are all tests of your social “tribe.” Wether you know the rules and or are willing to adhere to them or not. A way to tell who is “one of the group” and who isn’t- and those outside a group are often considered problematic as they can’t be relied on to act in that groups best interests. Someday it may literally be the opposite and having NO tattoos could cost you a job. I’ve actually experienced similar in social settings where NOT having tattoos made me an outsider and treated with bias.
*I know some° would argue that technically saying "don't get a tat or you won't have a job" doesn't mean "if you don't get a tat you will have a job". I know it's true, but we live in a society in which cognitive bias are definitely a thing so hammering that assertion like it's the only cause of not having a job will make people think that without tattoos they're good to go.
° I also have my suspicions about who would do that.
That's a good point though!