RAF Officer Tattoo Policy

[bravadofridays]

Hi All,

I am currently waiting to start officer selection, and wondered what the policy on tattoos is. I do not yet have one, but I plan on getting two of them.

They are not offensive, they will be latin phrases one on each forearm. One will say "primus inter pares" and the other "veni, vidi, vici"

however I have heard that this may actually prohibit me from passing selection, as although these do not breach regulations - Tattoos are not "an officers sport"

Can any of you shed some light on the issue for me, will my application be looked down on if I get the above and make it more likely I do not get accepted?

Thanks

Bravadofridays

 

[vim_fuego]

If you were to get them on your forearms then go to OASC it will probably wear on your mind, even if we say its fine to get tatted up, that it might have some bearing in these hyper competitive times for selection...So with that in mind and your life not actually depending on having some writing on your arms why not wait until you get selected, get through IOT and through professional training?

 

[penfold93]

I am not 100% sure but pre my OASC we had to fill in a form (a body map) to show if we had tats and where they were.

It may not be against regs but it was frowned upon and I know a few guys who wear long sleeved shirts and ties to cover up the fact they have tats.

As Vim says either wait until you have become an Officer or have them on the upper arm, back or anywhere that is easily covered by T-shirt/shorts.

You must decide what is most important in your life, becoming an Officer in the RAF or getting a tat, I would argue the former rather than the latter.

 

[Mickwreay]

Sorry mate, if you need to ask this question, I'm thinking you're gonna struggle anyway!

Would you have a skin full, a strong curry the night before your selection or turn up late on purpose ?

The RAF is getting smaller, the pool of applicants is getting bigger and if you can’t come to the correct conclusion to your question then I’m not sure you are ready. In my humble opinion.

 

[Warwick Hunt]

BF, the official tattoo policy is as long as tattoos aren't overtly visible i.e. on head/face and hands and visible in No 1 HD uniform and aren't of an offensive nature, then having them is fine. You will be sent a tattoo proforma with your application paperwork whereby you will declare your tattoos, showing where they are on your body and what they look like. Having tattoos prior to entry, provided they meet the criteria above, are not a bar to service and will have no bearing on your application, so don't worry about that.

 

[bravadofridays]

thanks guys, thats the reason i asked - if it would be a potential problem then i have no problem not getting them until a later date. A lot of what you have said is what I had heard, so just wanted it confirmed. Obv I know they are not against regulation, but dont want to do anything to mess up my chances beforehand.

 

[busby1971]

As per WH but agree with Vim, tattoos do give off a negative stereotype in some peoples mind, if it worrying you now it will certainly worry you later. Additionally the Latin phases you have chosen may not portray the best of attitudes in an officer.

 

[jacknifej]

Mouth Tattoo

Mouth Tattoo

Dear all, I have a similar problem in nature.

I currently have a tattoo on the inside of my mouth. It is not offensive, and would not be visible in a No. 1 uniform (many don't know I have it, and I mostly forget myself).

Will this bar me from Officer Selection?

Kind Regards,
J.

Please could you answer this thread or PM me?

 

[Reformed Scribbly]

Inside your mouth? Why? This a Wah?

Asides from that it would be unlikely that it would be a bar, if as you say it cannot be seen.

If it is visible when you are speaking, then that IMHO, would be a bar, as I wouldn't consider it acceptable and wouldn't sign you off as being eligible.

 

[amfortas]

At OASC 'everything' about you is 'evidence' of likely success.

If you have no tatts, stay that way until you are in.

If you really wants tatts asap then at least have them say something positive about you.

Perhaps have Air Vice Marshal stripes tattood on your shoulders and an RAF roundel on each buttock.

DT_Xtremez_19:

 

[busby1971]

Bar to service

Bar to service

A tattoo in the mouth should be considered as a part of the head and therefore should be a bar to service.

It would be down to your AFCO to sign it off or not. If you do not declare it then your first dental check would reveal it.

 

[Merlin55]

At OASC 'everything' about you is 'evidence' of likely success.

If you have no tatts, stay that way until you are in.

If you really wants tatts asap then at least have them say something positive about you.

Perhaps have Air Vice Marshal stripes tattood on your shoulders and an RAF roundel on each buttock.

DT_Xtremez_19:

Its funny you should say that... DT_Xtremez_27:

 

[OldMedic]

Sir, tattoos are for other ranks, not officers!

 

[reccemaster]

Sir, tattoos are for other ranks, not officers!

Not a personal dig, but I do hope that this statement is tongue in cheek.

If the tattoo itself and its location complies with the regulations, then I would hope we (as a society and the armed services in general) have moved away from dangerous negative stereotyping, and 'something for the other ranks'.

I'm sure many would agree that being from a well to do family should not label you a snob. Not having a private schooling labels you stupid or thick, and neither should having a tattoo that conforms to regulations label you some sort of yob, and imply your unworthy of holding the Queens Commission.

I completely understand that having a tattoo that can't be hidden may cause difficulties in some public scenarios, either from incorrect stereotyping or not, and on that basis I agree with being able to hide your tattoo. I do not agree however with it being an officer taboo.

Does having a tattoo say anything about the persons personality traits? Surly it depends on the responce when asked about it.

Fictitious response (a). "I was drunk on the way back from the pub one night, and as I walked past the tat shop I remember thinking 'that's a good idea'. It has no real relevance to me but the Monopoly mans face does look kind of cool."

Fictitious response (b). "My family heritage is New Zealand Mowry of which I am very proud of. Following my late grandfathers passing to whom I was very close, I wanted to honour him and my family history. After careful deliberation, I chose an understated traditional design on my right forearm."

Fictitious response (c). "Tattoo sir. Me sir. Please sir! That's something for the ranks isn't it? Bad show all that body painting. What, what what." (twisting the ends of the mustache with one hand and taps the blazer hip pocket with the other).

Fictitious response (d). "No sir, I don't have any tattoos myself. I know people that have them, and accept that it is a personal choice. It's not somthing that has particularly interested me."

I offer response (b) and (d) above as acceptable.

 

[vim_fuego]

Not a personal dig, but I do hope that this statement is tongue in cheek.
If the tattoo itself and its location complies with the regulations, then I would hope we (as a society and the armed services in general) have moved away from dangerous negative stereotyping, and 'something for the other ranks'.

I'm sure many would agree that being from a well to do family should not label you a snob. Not having a private schooling labels you stupid or thick, and neither should having a tattoo that conforms to regulations label you some sort of yob, and imply your unworthy of holding the Queens Commission.

I completely understand that having a tattoo that can't be hidden may cause difficulties in some public scenarios, either from incorrect stereotyping or not, and on that basis I agree with being able to hide your tattoo. I do not agree however with it being an officer taboo.

Does having a tattoo say anything about the persons personality traits? Surly it depends on the responce when asked about it.

Fictitious response (a). "I was drunk on the way back from the pub one night, and as I walked past the tat shop I remember thinking 'that's a good idea'. It has no real relevance to me but the Monopoly mans face does look kind of cool."

Fictitious response (b). "My family heritage is New Zealand Mowry of which I am very proud of. Following my late grandfathers passing to whom I was very close, I wanted to honour him and my family history. After careful deliberation, I chose an understated traditional design on my right forearm."

Fictitious response (c). "Tattoo sir. Me sir. Please sir! That's something for the ranks isn't it? Bad show all that body painting. What, what what." (twisting the ends of the mustache with one hand and taps the blazer hip pocket with the other).

Fictitious response (d). "No sir, I don't have any tattoos myself. I know people that have them, and accept that it is a personal choice. It's not somthing that has particularly interested me."

I offer response (b) and (d) above as acceptable.

Wow!

You could have saved yourself a whole bunch of typing if you'd just left it at the sentence I have highlighted as it so obviously to me is...I'll explain.

Back in the beginning of the RAF and through I would say into the mid seventies although the timings are open slightly to debate having a commission and especially a flying commission did require many of the trimmings of a good if not private education. You probably were from a good family and we put them on a pedastal further by giving them some fairly dashing and technical pieces of equipment to whizz around the sky in. We also gave many of them batty's...These were like personal stewards who not only attended to the officers needs but also their young wives when they first started out. I used to sail with an old fast jet navigator who told me of his first batty who would help around their quarter, brush him down for specks of lint and lick a hanky to get that speck of the full English he'd just had before he walked out the door to go to work...An airmen in those days didn't have a first name and the relationship between 'them and us' had very clear and defined boundaries...

So that is the period that old medic refers back to 'tounge in cheek'...I'm fairly sure we all do it these days when bantering an 'O'...If they say 'I'm going to wash the car on Saturday' we say 'I thought you'd have a chap to do that for you!' and you normally get a suitable responce involving naughty words...banter! We also mostly have first names when the room is suitably populated and the boudaries are still there but the line isn't as straight as our jobs are all so much more interlaced...For instance I fly with up to Flt Lt's on my jet and I'm (one of) the EW and Surveillance instructors. If they are fresh off the OCU they come to me next and I take them up to 'Combat Ready' rating. To do this we have to have a good working relationship and lots of trust...on the jet its first names no matter who is around...on the ground in the crewroom if there is a sqn exec or higher present I use Flt Lt***** or Sir out of courtesy and respect...I'm sure many on here are the same...we all play 'the game' as it is known...

 

[OldMedic]

Not a personal dig, but I do hope that this statement is tongue in cheek.


It has taken you six days to rise to the bait!

I have always disliked tattoos and think that many are done with little thought to the future and regretted by their owners in later life. Tattoos on an older person look so sad when faded and wrinkled. However, I would defend your right to have them even if I considered it ill-judged.

VM - your comments are spot on!

 

[Reformed Scribbly]

RM,

I've not seen anyone rejected on the basis that if they have a tattoo, they are not suitable for a commission as it is patently nonsense, so relax there.

As stated before it is purely for eligibility criteria that we check these things.

As for the working relationship, Vim has it spot on, that's thanks to the general calibre of individual in the service.