SMA talks tattoos
ROS sends us a link to a Stars & Stripes article in which the Sergeant Major of the Army, Ray Chandler, addressed the most important national security issue facing our troops today; tattoos. Apparently, he is salivating at the thought of the Secretary of the Army signing the new regs into effect;
Media reports last year identified potential changes to rules governing things such make-up and fingernail polish, hair styles, body piercings, and the length of sideburns, among other items. Chandler, however, only confirmed changes to the policy on tattoos.
Under the new policy, new recruits will not be allowed to have tattoos that show below the elbows and knees or above the neckline, Chandler told troops. Current soldiers may be grandfathered in, but all soldiers will still be barred from having any tattoos that are racist, sexist or extremist.
Once the rules are implemented, soldiers will sit down with their unit leaders and “self identify” each tattoo. Soldiers will be required to pay for the removal of any tattoo that violates the policy, Chandler said.
I suppose that soon as the troops stop getting tattoos, and start to learn more about the Afghan culture, the Taliban will have no choice but to surrender. Way to focus on what’s important, SMA Chandler. Maybe a couple more police calls around the D-Fac will speed up our victory in Afghanistan, too. Just being helpful.
Category: Military issues
While I think it pretty bullshit and mostly petty…. I can actually see parts of that as legit. Facial/Neck?Head tattoos should not be allowed. However, given the fact I had Tats below the elbow when the SMA Chandler was in fucking grade school while I was jumping from high performance aircraft, the SMA may KMA (kiss my ass, fo those of you wondering..).
Thing is I agree with a lot of his thoughts on discipline, but he is not fighting the fights that should be fought right now. Like mainitaining our fighting capability as his boss Obama is trying to destroy it.
And rock painting, need to paint rocks.
He goes to AFG and talks about tattoos?!?! Tattoos on the forearm and lags that can’t be seen in a dress uniform anyway.
I think the coming years will be worse than the ‘peace-dividend’ experienced in the 90’s. One key difference being we weren’t coming off years of protracted fighting before our drawdown.
Wait till the next knockdown dragout high attrition conflict. The Army will say “what tattoo/piercings policy?”.
High standards for the PT test? Naw.
High standards for marksmanship? Nope.
High standards for military knowledge? No way.
Tattoos that no one can see unless you’re in your PT gear? WE GOTTA SQUARE THAT SHIT AWAY ASAP!!
BTW, the finest helicopter pilot I ever knew was a Major named Plumhoff, guy had more tats than I have fingers and toes. Unfortunately, he got killed when his helo shit an engine on take-off one night south of Kandahar and he managed to land it right side up on broken terrain. Saved most of the crew, but he, one of the aerial gunners and a Sgt Major from 10th Mountain didn’t make it out. Must have been all those tattoos, I reckon….
Chandler spends too much time looking at the the little things. He is on the warpath against tattoos but seems to accept fat soldiers waddling around the Pentagon and other rear-echelon sites. His priorities are all wrong.
I think NO recruit should ever have any tattoos or body piercings, because an intelligence mission may require the soldier to go in mufti and work incognito, blending in with the population and the environment.
Tattoos and/or body piercings might easily blow the operative’s cover.
Besides, the Bible very plainly states that we are not to mark or pierce the body.
@6 …You’re fucking with me, right?
@6, you can’t see it, but I am facepalming so f’n hard right now. do you live in the 1950’s? Should I be clean shaven right now and have a buzz cut too?
@6, im hoping that was a joke. find me where that shows up in the bible please. it is stated not to mark yourself for the dead (so all yall with your memorial tats with dob and doe for your fallen brothers are sinners) you do know that most of the prophets of the christian religion would have had brands and piercings, right? when jacob worked as an indentured servant to his father in law for 14 years, he would have worn the brand of their house. branding is the first form of tattooing after all.
so soldiers that have been serving with their tatts, now must pay for their removal? i guess thats one way of chasing off all our experienced soldiers and leaving only the wimpy pathetic weaklings behind.
From the wrist to the elbow? Below the knees? WTF? The one and only tattoo I have is on my shin and I got that in the Army. I’ll admit, I think the whole tattoo thing has gotten out of hand. I think it appropriate that you should not be able to see a tattoo while wearing a uniform, but dayum….
SMA must be working with the MCPON–they have the same PC attitude.
On the other hand…
The tattoos are getting a bit carried away these days. Seems like everyone wants full sleeves and all the way up the neck. I see many women with tats behind the ears, on wrists, etc. They are clearly visible in service uniforms (most are short-sleeved) and even in dress uniforms.
Frankly, some of them are just getting distracting, so I can see that there has to be some limit. The age-old limits have been getting pushed pretty far lately.
In times of (relative) peace and draw-downs, I guess the little things become more important.
Yeah, because we, as a nation base all our decisions on a book that was written and changed who knows how many times over who knows how many years that lemmings just take as truth because they are told to do so. Just stop. SMA in my opinion needs to stop trying to conform the army to what he thinks it should be. Tattoos have been part of the identity of soldiers and the Army its self for years.
We are Soldiers, not ‘Operatices’ idiot. And as an NCO, I will not enforce this upon my Troops. I suppose that my Bible verse (John 15:13), and my Soldiers Cross are now considered extremist by the PC Police… I lost confidence and respect for that “man” as soon as he tried to implement a PT test consisting of a 4 mile run immediately followed by a 12 mile Ruck with NO breaks in between, and also, when I see pictures of him in his summer Class B’s with that damned Muffin Top hanging out of his trousers! I mean, he’s a SGM, and he’s NEVER heard of shirt stays??? Think before you say retarded shit! Jeez.
*Operatives
I’ve commented on this before, but I think this is yet another example of senior NCO leadership choosing a standard that is easy (tatoo? Yes/No) rather than one which would require them to actually take risk in making a judgement call, like if someone is a good performer or not.
The thing taht really bugs me is the “may be grandfathered” part. May? May? @3, they waived tatoo location standards when they were having trouble recruiting. Now that they need to draw down, they may or may not allow you to stay in with a tattoo that has been perfectly acceptable to the Army for the last ten years.
I don’t have any tattoos, and frankly don’t understand why anyone would get one. But if you let people in with them, then you should have a blanket exception for location if tehy had the tattoo before a certain date.
Anything other than that, as I said above, is just another attempt to thin the force without having to make any tough choices.
@6
Um Yeah.. a 6’2″ White guy with blonde hair and an accent from the PNW would otherwise blend in like James Bond, without the tats.
Think about it. Easiest way to get the numbers of Joes to be RIF’d is using Tats, PT scores, Ht/Wt and Bad Counseling. Since 2004 I’ve noticed Joes getting ridiculous amounts of tattoos. I know one kid who has his Dogtags to include the bead chain tattooed on his neck, chest. twice normal size. FFS I’ve seen SPC tattooes on arms of all things
We have soooo many PT failures and profiles, how about going after them INSTEAD of the perfectly capable troops with ink?
@6, My job as an Infantryman is to close with and kill the enemy not sneak around “incognito”. Even in a Scout Platoon we are all armed and in uniform. It’s the whole not getting shot as a spy thing.
SMA Chandler, another Obama lackey, just like Dempsey and Odierno, doing the dibbing of Dear Leader and his ilk.
I have two suck bag soldiers who I can’t get kicked out of the army due to the dissembling of my CO and 1sg. They can’t pass a pt test or height/weight to save their lives, and have volumes of negative counselings. I guess I should just shell out a few bucks to get them some forearm tattoos, that should do the trick.
In times of (relative) peace and draw-downs, I guess the little things become more important.
It has always been thus, mark – at least as long as I’ve been around the military and old enough to understand, at least partially, what was going on within the services. That’s 40+ years now.
And what I’ve read of history says it was much the same after World War I, II, and Korea as well.
After a shooting war winds down, we seem to start using chickensh!t for far more than fertilizer. Every damn time.
Look, I ain’t no expert.
I’m just stating my personal opinion, and no, I’m not joking.
The scripture forbidding tattoos is Leviticus 19:28.
You know that once you cross that line, swear that oath, and don that uniform, you belong to Uncle Sam.
Don’t think that you’ll ALWAYS be doing ONLY the job you were trained for in A.I.T.
During my time in the Army, I was a cavalry scout, and a military policeman, and a multichannel communications electronics repairman.
I served in Germany, Viet Nam, Korea, and the United States, with visits to Japan, Australia, Thailand, Mexico, Greece, Ireland, and Israel.
Special Forces personnel get assigned to CIA missions.
I know, because I personally saw it happen.
Any and all regular line troops could conceivably be sent on a clandestine mission requiring sterile conditions.
I know, because I personally saw it happen.
Military Police might need to work undercover.
Military Intelligence might need to work in mufti.
And yes, if you’re caught by the bad guys, your tattoos might reveal your identity and/or further compromise your mission and your unit.
There’s another area where tattoos are a career killer, and that’s show business.
I mention that because I’ve done some acting, and I’m a singer/songwriter.
When I was in the Army, I saw a LOT of guys who had a LOT of talent!
I reckon some of you guys might want to someday tread the boards and have gals go totally wild.
Well, if you’re wearing tattoos, how many roles are going to be available – – -, or more accurately, are NOT going to be available?
When you mark your body, you LIMIT your opportunities, whether it be in military service, law enforcement, or the entertainment industry.
John are you trolling or just stupid? How do I know that today when I walk out the door a giant anvil isn’t going to fall from the sky and crush me? Yeah I get it, limit choices in the military, why don’t they just have new recruits take vows and issues tabbards? For fucks sake…
Not arguing the you’ll work outside your MOS with you, I’m a CA NCO, and I’ve done the work of a Medic, HUMINT guy, MP, PSYOP, Infantryman, EWO, Logistician, and counter narcotics guy. But, cut the bullshit. Soldiers will be Soldiers, and if you tell me I won’t get into heaven for CHRISTIAN tattoos commemorating fallen Brothers, with a Bible Verse and a Cross, you can go straight to Hell, and I will meet you there. I do not appreciate someone coming in and telling me that the way I live MY life is wrong because it’s your opinion. It’s MY life. I am a Freemason, I was a Combat Vet before I was old enough to drink. I am 50% Disabled, and I can still PT circles around you. I’m not even out of my 20’s yet. So Respectfully John Robert, fuck off and draw fire
And I knew SO many sailors who had tattoos when Chandler was a twinkle in his daddy’s left eye!
Warhammer9, if you’re going to pay for tattoos on someone else, in the case of those two, it should be “IDIOT” on their foreheads.
Personally, I think the only place you guys should have a tatt is as per VADM Winslow:
VAdm. Dean Winslow: What do you think, Mr. Dodge?
LCdr. Tom Dodge: I think I’m gonna get my ass kicked, sir.
Winslow: Aw, don’t think like that! Damn it to hell, don’t go by the book! Think like a pirate! I want a man with a tattoo on his dick! Have I got the right man?
Dodge: By a strange coincidence, you do, sir.
I say we tattoo a phallic symbol on a certain E-9
I don’t have any tattoos, but only because funding such a venture would have reduced my beer ration for the month.
Awww guys, give Mr. Mallernee a break, I’m pretty sure he’s old enough to be at a minimum a father to most of the posters here, and a grandfather to some few. His opinion on tattoos and scripture shouldn’t be too shocking.
I personally am no longer a Christian and really don’t care that much about that faith’s many laws, but if one is a devout believer in that faith there are indeed a few areas in the Bible that admonish followers not to mark themselves. And while the whole ‘cutting yourself over the dead’ passage appears with the ‘printing marks on yourself’ passage in Laviticus 19:28, they are actually considered by bible scholars to be separate clauses, “nor print any marks upon you” stands alone and is not qualified by the previous “for the dead”. One of the reasons for this is because of supporting commentary elsewhere in the bible that shows marks on the body, especially in honor of some idol, were considered signs of apostasy and were an obstacle to returning to the faith. (Isa 44:5; Re13:17; 14:1)
Now to me personally it don’t mean a hill of beans, but to a devout octogenarian like John, or any devout fundimentalist, I imagine it means quite a bit.
On the topic of Chandler and his new pet project, is anyone really surprised? More stupidity out of one of the most stupid SMAs Ever. As others have mentioned, reasonable limits for decorum’s sake makes sense, but right now is not the time to picking this fight.
I personally, in my own opinion, and as a Christian, seriously do not like when someone who claims to be of faith, tells me I am wrong because I do not believe the same way they do, or live my own life the way they do. That is wrong, that is wrong, that is wrong. That’s what Hitler did, that’s what Stalin did, that’s what Saddam did, that’s what Zealots and despots do. That is NOT what Americans do.
I get that Lucky, hell it’s why I walked away from Christianity in particular, and religion entirely.
But I do have to ask, how do you square it with yourself when the way you’re living your life doesn’t square with the ‘Word’? I’m not saying that to be judgmental or to tell you you’re wrong, I’m just pointing out what I percieve to be an inconsistancy?
@15 In principle I don’t mind setting rules that limit where a tattoo can be, but SMA Chandler is being the biggest hypocrite about it. He first brought this up a year ago when he wanted to rewrite AR 670-1 to conform to his view of the world and called soldiers who had these various tattoos “dirtbags.” No kidding, he actually used that word in an interview and on more than once occasion. The Army said it was okay to hire these kids with those rules in effect and now because he wants to change that rule these soldiers are no longer good people. For as many times as he has said he wants the policy changed, he won’t stick his neck out and admit it was a bad policy to begin with. Can’t have it both ways.
y’all can back off on John Mallernee – he may not be your generation but his views are his own and he obviously put in the time to earn ’em. Don’t denigrate his time because he disagrees.
Bluntly, in many cases he is right – yes, ink is more acceptable now but there are a lot of people who still look at it as immature (and bluntly, little of it is “art”) and much of it is silly. You want it, go nuts – but bear in mind there are times when tattoos DO limit your options, and don’t whine about the consequences to choices you made.
Jacobite: to me, I was brought up to believe that God forgives, you just have to ask. I’ve done sinful stuff, but I am penitent, I live a good life, I have a moral code, hell, I have to as a Mason, I draw the line when someone comes and attempts to force their religion on other people. I’ve struggled with my faith for a very very long time. I will not EVER tolerate anyone questioning another persons beliefs or how they live their life (within reason, and Stolen Valor and Hippie idiots excluded), based on their own questionable morals and dogma. I have friends and Brother Masons that are Muslim, Gay, lost faith, whatever. But, here’s the beautiful part: we are human, and humans make mistakes, we fuck up. I’ve rambled enough. Hopefully you get my point
David is that your leave Britney alone moment?
You know what, more wisdom from the SMA…
http://www.duffelblog.com/2013/05/sergeant-major-chandler-you-know-what-fuck-it-everyones-gonna-wear-three-reflective-belts-during-pt/
http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/11/sma-chandler-putting-your-hands-in-your-pockets-will-get-you-killed/
@32: I am in exact agreement with you on Chandler. He is a big disappointment. He also said that when they do the drawdown, they are going to get rid of the “deadwood.” Well I hate to say it, but with the numbers they’re talking about, they’re going to be cutting some well qualified, well performing, experienced soldiers. So why would you say something like that in the first place? He has an endstate in mind, and he’s going to a) look for easy ways to make cuts–things that won’t get their decisionmaking questioned. Tatoos, weight, and PT tests are the three easiest ones–and b) he’s going to say whatever he wants to in order to justify it in his mind. Regardless of how stupid, ill thought out, or self serving it happens to be. Like I siad before, changing standards on something you relaxed during teh war, and then saying you “might” be grandfathered, is a cop out. They were good enough for you when you needed cannon-fodder with those tattoos, they should be good enough for you now. Performance, UCMJ, stuff like that is all fair game to go after in a drawdown. But don’t change a standard and tehn say someone is a dirtbag for not meeting it if it’s a standard you arbitrarily changed. Every issue of Army Times I read lately makes me more and more glad I retired. My wife is a huah, huah battalion commander in the reserve components, and even she has started to count the days until she can retire.
@36 Speaking of the genius of SMA Chandler, he also stuck his foot in his mouth a few months ago when the Army was thinking about suspending Tuition Assistance. He’s looking at rewriting the rules to include a time in service/rank prerequisite which I don’t mind, but included in his analysis was a conversation with a soldier who complained that he was one class short of a Masters when they turned TA off for a few weeks. Chandler’s response was to belittle the soldier for being a full time student and not soldiering enough. Nobody in the Army is a full time student unless that is their place of duty. Apparently Chandler thinks we should be reading nothing but FMs and TMs in our off-hours. For all Chandler knows this guy could have come into the army with a BA and wanted to do better. The promotion point system for NCOs heavily weights civilian education, but this soldier is wrong for pursuing a degree? Why does Chandler think TA exists in the first place?
JustPlainJason – no, but in the real world Mr. Mallernee is dead on the money. Just because the Gen X and Yers love ink does not mean that in many areas of the civilian world, ink is not looked on favorably. And before anyone turns their nose up at civilians… they pay your way, and more importantly, when you retire that’s all you are — just another fucking civilian with better stories to tell. In almost any progfessional job – we’re talking white collar where the bucks are, or for that matter, most jobs that deal with the public – if you have significant tattoos, you ain’t getting hired because you project the wrong image. Even in many relatively lower-paying jobs, if you have sleeves and can’t cover ’em with a shirt – you’re not getting hired. It may not be fair – but people with lots of visible ink are part of a very small minority.
You know, for the longest time I thought that Army regulation forbade piercings for male Soldiers. It wasn’t until I got to recruiting and saw an E-7 in civilian clothing sporting earrings that I bothered doing the research. Come to find out, it was just 101st ABN policy (circa 2002–not sure if it’s changed) that stated that no male Screaming Eagle would wear earrings on or off-duty. I share that because I’ve always considered military service to be about uniformity as opposed to standing out in a crowd. When I got the 101st “Blue Book” as an E-1 I didn’t question the standards; in retrospect I consider my service there one of the things that set my peers and I apart from less disciplined Soldiers. Many of my friends sport sleeves, and some of those outside of the military are tatted on their hands and necks. Personally, I’ve got mixed views on it. I think that well-done sleeves can be a work of art, but I also think that tattooing parts of the body which cannot be easily covered can be a mistake. Like it or not, many employers do not want to hire someone sporting highly visible tattoos. I’m neutral when it comes to recruiting only those young men and women who can cover their tattoos in summer PTs. In my experience, most Soldiers only get tattoos in those places AFTER they enlist anyway. They can be a distraction, however, and in this day and age can open other Soldiers up to possible sexual harassment complaints. Seeing a female Soldier a couple of days ago who sported a calf tattoo, I kept finding my gaze wandering down to see what it said. To the casual observer I might have been “ogling” her, which in this day and age would be a potential career-ender. It was none of my business, but I know few people who do not find their curiosity piqued by a visible tattoo or other marking. I’ve got a couple of tattoos myself which are covered unless I’m shirtless or sleeveless. As an Infantryman who’s a fan… Read more »
Who defines terms? What is “sexist”?
I can see it now. “Extremist” equates “Support and Defend”.
David can I start calling you dad? You just gave me fatherly advice that I have never heard before and I am glad you are here to impart your wisdom upon me. I’ll keep it in mind when I interview for my spy/investment banker job.
FM you have a GWAR tat that qualifies as an EO complaint right there.
Blah blah blah, Leviticus says………….. how about everyone thats so damn fond of what Leviticus has to say reads the whole damn thing and adjusts their lifestyle accordingly?
In my holy book it says that you will not make it into Happy Happy Joy Joy Land unless you do have tattoos, so I guess all you non-believers are hosed. See I just made my own rules with blackjack and hookers…daa forget the blackjack.
Tattoos were fine when we needed guys to put their lives on the line and fight two wars, but now that we are racing back to a garrison Army, we are no longer good enough to be soldiers.
How about this- ban all generals and CSMs that can’t figure out how to win a war (that would be all of them). The rest of us can get back to being real soldiers.
#42,
I’ve been considering a self-referral (to EO) anyway…
Johnny Two Thumbs on Orchard Road in Singapore. Tattoo artist.
Speaking of generational thing, my grandfather was an infantryman during WWII and he had a tattoo on his forearm. I just wonder if it is the army’s tendency to stamp out any new tradition as a form of “shitbaggery”.
Well, at least the Army will be free of gang bangers, until we need them again. No more kids from the barrio and the ghettos. Lots of combat trained homies set loose on the south sides of Chicago and LA.
It wouldn’t be in keeping with the good order and discipline of the Army for me to express my views on these changes.
I’ll just merely observe that the average E-6 (and every E-7) in the Army today probably has more time in a combat zone than SMA does.