Marine Corps

Tattoos: A Stifled Tradition

As time progresses, warfare evolves. Security measures are ever-changing, thus feeding the cycle of the evolution of war. The Marine Corps need to focus on acquiring and retaining the best and brightest, regardless of whether the applicant or Marine has tattoos on his or her arms or legs. As any organization, business, or congregation leader will admit, people are our greatest asset. As for the Marine Corps, Marines are our greatest asset. We are all more than aware that the issue of tattoo policy has been discussed to the point that saying discussing it any further is merely beating a dead horse doesnt do it justice. However, there are several points should be addressed as it pertains to the topic. Societies continued acceptance of tattoos in the workplace, tattoos’ place in warrior cultures, and premature separation of stellar Marines being chief among them. 

In such volatile times, the Marine Corps must remain a force in readiness. This means the service must recruit and retain the most intelligent, physically fit, and adaptive fighting force that the Marine Corps has ever had. Yet, otherwise eligible young men and women are denied the chance to serve based on forearm or leg tattoos. Reenlistment to Marines who have performed well beyond what is expected of them, both in combat and out of combat. Every year, many units stress about low retention numbers, yet the service feels the need to limit who is eligible to join its ranks based on something so trivial. Security is something that is always applicable, and the best way to overcome the challenges to come is to create the most lethal force possible. 

In a society that has become, and continues to become, more accepting of tattoos that are visible in a T-shirt, the Marine Corps is only limiting itself when it comes to who gets the opportunity to go through recruit training. An applicant with tattoos on his or her arm larger than their own hand could be otherwise more competitive than an applicant with no tattoos, but is discarded as disqualified while the applicant with no tattoos gets to join the Corps. The service could increase its talent pool of by including these disqualified individuals and comparing everyone on a performance basis. The Marine Corps can get ahead of the curve by matching the tattoo policy of the Navy. The civilian workforce is adapting based on need, 47 percent of Millennials have tattoos, and the following generation is even more accepting. Marine Corps markets itself to people around the age of 18 as the target audience, and approximately 40 percent of people with tattoos got their first prior to age 18.  

Warpaint—many cultures have worn it into battle. A good example of this is the Native American Seminole Tribe. It served many purposes, such as increasing a warriors confidence on the battlefield, intimidating enemies, and expressing certain accomplishments. Think about most venomous or poisonous animals in nature. Many animals bear bright colored markings as a warning to would be predators not to mess with them, whether it is a bluff or a warning to help the predator live another day. Marines are lethal, Marines are warriors, Marines love their warpaint. 

Aside from past use of warpaint, many Marines have been denied continued service because of their tattoos. While the Marines Corps has done a great job of not discriminating among violators of its orders, I cannot help but think that maybe some of these Marines were stellar in their field. Tattoos ultimately are a victimless crime, especially when being compared to domestic violence or DUIs, both of which plague our ranks. The key difference is that while the latter bring with them harsher consequences, it often is easier for a career to recover from an arrest than it is from out of regulation tattoos. That is because the marks on a career caused by arrest are not visible everyday. They do not show up in promotion or reenlistment photos. A Marine that has been arrested gets the punishment up front, and then it subsides, only to be brought up again later, if one looks in the right place. Tattoos must be waived,or removed, but still place a ceiling above many Marines. 

A number of years ago, the Marine Corps Times published an article about a Marine fighting for the chance to stay in his beloved Corps. This Marines name was Sergeant Knapp. Knapp was a young sergeant, with two combat tours and a Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal with valor device. What Sergeant Knapp did not count on was his 0311” tattoo, displaying his military occupational specialty, cutting his seemingly successful career short. The Marine Corps needs to consider if the restrictive tattoo policy is worth removing effective leaders. 

At the end of the day, the Marine Corps will produce policy, and as Marines we will follow those policies or we will exit the service—one way or another. The longer the Corps goes with narrowing the selection pool, the more the service will degrade the force from within. The high turnover rate within the Marine Corps means it must adapt its standards to get the pick of the litter. It is important to challenge policies, within reason, in an effort to invoke the change we would like to see in the organization. Tattoos are preventing the Corps from screening many otherwise eligible young men and women for service, and societies acceptance of tattoos will only make the pool of eligible people smaller. Warpaint has been a tradition of warrior cultures throughout history, and still is for the Army and the Navy. The e careers of promising Marines have been prematurely terminated based on something literally skin deep. I am not saying the Corps should go overboard with leniency, but I am saying the service should consider opening the policy just as the Navy has. Let us take a look at a greater pool of people for enlistment and reenlistment. Let us embrace our warrior culture. Let us build the most lethal fighting force. 

 

 

Back To Top