Making discriminating choices is a key point in this debate
So, here’s the question: Why would Gilroy High School sanction a tattoo page in the annual yearbook?
Of course, there’s the argument that it’s a student fact of life and that the yearbook is merely a reflection of what’s going on in the culture. We understand. Drinking is also a fact of student life, and though there’s a distinction for many reasons, the point is this: The school district should make discriminating choices regarding what to highlight, and what not to highlight, in the student yearbook.
It’s not a matter of students with tattoos being low class or, as some columnists, letter writers and Red Phone callers have suggested, worse.
Clearly those are reactionary stances of very dubious merit, and the derogatory comments only serve to inflame. Students have tattoos for various reasons, and certainly students should not be judged on their body art alone.
Still, that brings us back to the question of why the high school would invite students to “come behind the theater building at lunch” and have a pictures of their tattoos taken. What if Johnny shows up and wants to show off his gang tattoo? Then what? Ah, the policy is … that GHS accepts roses, fairies and butterflies, but not numbers and certain insignias?
That’s the problem. It’s a matter of not using good judgment from the outset. Why open Pandora’s box when the truth is there are plenty of student activities that could certainly use an extra page of recognition in the yearbook.
Even the question of legality begs the judgment issue. According to the state penal code, tattoo artists are not allowed to ink those under 18 – even with parental permission. By extension then, the school district is promoting illegal activity. OK, we understand that’s over the top, but it’s still a fact, and again it comes back to sound judgment. Why put the spotlight on this as a reflection of the school? Is it really how the Gilroy Unified School District wants the community to see Gilroy High? Who’s going to care about Becca’s “tat” in 20 years?
The other oft-invoked refrain has been, “A lot of other schools are doing it, so …” So what? That logic is simply a profession of weakness in that scrutiny and judgment are tossed to the wind.
Gilroy High’s administration should put the kibosh on this tattoo-page idea and engage the yearbook staff in a discussion on other possibilities to fill valuable space. It’s not because students with tattoos are any worse or better than others, it’s because the decision to highlight them opens up a can of worms – and why open it when there are so many other options?
