Some SA Apartments Banning Tattoos

[Cloud]

Originally Posted by orthodoc

Visible tattoos and multiple piercings do tend to be over-represented among populations who are likely to be involved in violence or illegal activities; ask any police officer or ER doctor. It's too bad for the hard-working, law-abiding tattooed and pierced population, but there it is.

that doesn't quite wash, since they are not undressing the rest of the population. It's like doctors saying that most piercings get infected. Well, duh--that's what they see, so that's the way it seems. Incomplete data leads to erroneous conclusions.

So, the apartment owners get to say who lives there. Fine. It's not illegal, it's not discrimination. I still find it reprehensible behavior. People like that probably find some excuse not to rent to non-white people, people with children, etc. And no, I don't have any evidence of this, I'm just speculating.

I wouldn't want to live in a self-described "upscale" community, anyfuckingway.

[orthodoc]

Originally Posted by Cloud

that doesn't quite wash, since they are not undressing the rest of the population. It's like doctors saying that most piercings get infected. Well, duh--that's what they see, so that's the way it seems. Incomplete data leads to erroneous conclusions.

I said visible tattoos and multiple piercings tend to be over-represented. You know, the kind that don't require undressing to see. But doctors (in general) don't say that most piercings get infected. That's your erroneous speculation or anecdote.

People like that probably find some excuse not to rent to non-white people, people with children, etc. And no, I don't have any evidence of this, I'm just speculating.

So it's all right to make sweeping pejorative generalizations about 'people like that' with no evidence whatsoever, as long as 'they' are .. what? 'Other'? 'Not like you'?

I wouldn't want to live in a self-described "upscale" community, anyfuckingway.

Then it's a win-win situation.

[Hime]

It shouldn't be illegal, but it is closed-minded and annoying. OMG, people with tattoos are scary!

[Cloud]

hope they have a happy little community of plainskins there.

[lookout123]

i've got tattoos so i wouldn't qualify to live there, but it is their business. my tattoos aren't a condition i was born with or came down with, they are something i chose to add to my skin. if someone doesn't want to do business with me because i have them, that is cool, it is there choice.

chances are this is their way of making sure that no hood rats move in. i'm sure they realize that plenty of fine upstanding americans have tattoos and piercings that aren't easily visible when clothed.

[Aliantha]

The next thing they'll say is that women can only have long hair, and men can only have short hair. Children must have bangs and...and...and...what about if they're allowed pets? Does that mean that only pets without tattoos can live there? (over here if you get your animal micro chipped they put a little tattoo in the ear. I don't know if it's the same there or not)

[Cloud]

If they can screen their tenants for appearance, that's awfully close to screening them for the color of their skin (natural color) or the shape of their eyes.

It rubs me the wrong way, because I see so much regimentation in housing. I argue with my boss all the time on this, 'cause we do a lot of restrictive covenants for real estate. So, if you are a subdivider, you can specify the materials and color of the exterior of the house, no satellite dishes or motor homes parked in the yards, etc. It's all so creepy a la Stepford to me. My boss's argument is, well, if you don't have these things, pretty soon there's old couches and cars up on blocks in the yard. And probably naked brown babies, too, 'tho he doesn't say that expressly.

Bah! I just don't like to be told how to live.

[Cloud]

Piercings are not related to gang activity, so why the ban on them?

They just don't want those kind of people in their apartments.

[Aliantha]

Well, I think it's probably owned by conservative snobs who live in the past and don't realize they're living in a fools paradise, if they're not very lucky, it's going to come back and bite them on the arse.

[TheMercenary]

I must say that until we do a large scale study of all people with tats or piercings we cannot make comments about people who have them. There really is no imperical data to support such notions.

We can make comments about gangbangers and criminals and state that many of them have tats. But there is absolutely no way we can say that people who have tats are criminals and therefore I suspect some savy lawyer will come along and sue the hell out of that business.

[ZenGum]

[quote=TheMercenary;391577]I must say that until we do a large scale study of all people with tats or piercings we cannot make comments about people who have them. There really is no imperical data to support such notions.

True, but we need even more
We need to randomly select (say...) 10,000 people with tattoos and/or piercings, and 10,000 people without tattoos and or piercings, and compare the incidence of anti-social behavior between the two groups.
Then we will have empirical data ... but then what?

Suppose there is a difference, and that the tattooed group is more anti-social? Are we then allowed to exclude one INDIVIDUAL because of a resemblance to a group? What about (this is true) my 65-year-old, law abiding mother, who is a retired community nurse and active Justice of the Peace, with a lotus flower tattooed on her ankle? Yeah she's trouble, she is...

Suppose there is no difference. Are private groups allowed to limit the memberships of their groups to "people like us"? Or does the state have the right to force groups to admit members no one in the group likes? I find the former distasteful and the latter outrageous.
(A dangerous topic for my first post! Gee, I hope you guys like me! )

[glatt]

Welcome, ZenGum!

[Kitsune]

Oh, won't someone think of the property values?

[lookout123]

oh, won't someone think of the right of the property owner to be an idiot? if he wants to be a poor business person and limit his pool of clients to folks that haven't gotten tattoos or multiple piercings then so what? i think it is stupid, but what is the big deal?

[slang]

I don't have any tattoos or piercings.

Those people that have them kinda freak me out. It's not that I'll avoid them but that I'll put them into "that catagory" of people. At least until we have a chance to talk.

There have been some pretty cool people that I've met with tattoos and piercings. I'm cautious when talking with them because they are almost always left leaning "this and that is my right and I'll do whatever I God damned well please and you can fuck yourself " sort of person.

Normally they are that sort of person that is totally opposite of who I am.

Now, if this somehow sounds like you, we could still be friends. I know you don't need friends but generally speaking this is the case.

There was a guy I met in Florida that was a great photographer and web artist. He wore eyeliner which was a bit different but was a genuinely nice guy.

We didn't talk politics much.