Mongo is correct if we are talking about the OP
SVG said:
Is it prohibited once accepted to be tattood prior to R-day? I'm aware that once in the academy, you have to agree not to get further tattoos while there, so I really want to get mine now.
That was the question and honestly, when I read the post I had
moment.
As I sat at the computer, I thought are you Freaking kidding me? DodMERB, bubble wrap mean anything to you? You are willing even the slightest chance of infection for a tat?
Yeah, let's try to negotiate the fine line!
Sorry, but even now, I find it insane.
You want a tat? Do it, but at the same moment I have to ask why you are asking here? If you investigated the tat policy, you know it. No need to ask it, UNLESS, you are asking from a peer pov. Exactly what Mongo is stating when he stated
And don't even attempt to try to convince me that peer pressure has nothing to do with the sudden 'need' to express oneself via body art.
If you investigated the regs, you know the answer, WP says no new tats between appointment and R day, thus the question is why pose it?
The lines are pretty drawn here. Neither side is budging. JMPO, Officers with NO tats are no better than officers WITH tats. Just like women with pierced ears compared to non-pierced.
That being said, to ignore the fact that today's military has a stigma related to tats, is like ignoring the fact that gauges on women don't have a stigma.
This is the society for today. We can all play 20 yrs from now, but let's remember between today and 20 yrs there are a lot of promotion boards.
The OP asked, it has been answered. I have to say if you look up and down the forums, most AD or cadets will question why due to the regs that currently exist.