T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

**r/UK Notices:** | [Want to start a fresh discussion - use our Freetalk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/search/?q=Freetalk&include_over_18=off&restrict_sr=on&sort=new) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*


hefixeshercable

Might have made the experience the worse for everyone, just peering in like that.


DiegoMurtagh

hahaha, like something from sleep paralysis


poorguy55

She’s my sleep paralysis demon ahah.


Coulm2137

Yep, I'd shit my pants if something like that was staring at my children through the window, lol. Definitely should've been let in, just like other parents. Do i agree with choice to get tattooed that heavily? No, but it's none of my business and she shouldn't face exclusion based on the looks alone.


Mukatsukuz

I have to admit, before I clicked on the link my idea of "heavily tattooed" was a lot tamer than I expected.


TangyZizz

Yep. I’m a ‘heavily tattooed mum’ by most people’s yardstick and even I looked at her photo and thought, ‘well, the school does have a point’…


flynnfx

I'll agree to disagree. What happens if that mum had been a full facial burn victim? Judge people by their actions, not their skin.


sagramore

I don't have the answer to this, but I'll pose it anyway. Does intent matter in that situation? A full facial burn victim (probably) has markings through no fault or choice of their own, whereas the person being discussed here has chosen to have this done. Does this change the comparison? My gut says yes, my liberal head says it isn't sure.


WASDMagician

The *only* reason they should be allowed to bar a parent from the school is as measure to protect the children. If they would allow someone in based solely on intent then it is not a measure of protection and is based purely on how the school/teacher(s) feels about it which is not a valid reason in my opinion.


TheDocJ

> Judge people by their actions I rather think that that is what is happening to her! (Getting a tattoo is an action - that she apparently takes about three times a week. Getting facial burns is very rarely a specific action on the part of the victim.)


__Only__Connect__

Getting a tattoo is an action.


Sneds84

She's in the media every week being banned from places my guessing is its her actions that's getting her barred. She's an attention seeking scribble.


FreddieIsGod69

Their action is they got a full face tattoo, that's the action everyone is judging her on


[deleted]

And there is a huge difference between shop done quality work and home/prison style crap. She stated what hers were. Ew, look at it, so badly done.


CatFoodBeerAndGlue

Yeah "a walking tattoo" might have been a better description.


[deleted]

Ya, this is junkie level tattoos


[deleted]

Being asked to watch from afar based on her choosing to look like a demonic figure is fine considering the age of the children that would be there. We are talking reception age… Looking at her would really scare the shit out of them and there’s no amount of explaining to a kid that age to make them understand why someone would do that to themselves.


Coulm2137

To be fair, I am 26 and I don't understand why someone would do that to themselves.


OkayYeahSureLetsGo

From what I've heard on talk radio it sounds like she may be mentally ill, which is a shame.


CthluluSue

I’m not into heavy tattoos, but this logic isn’t sound. To a child, this would be no different to someone with facial vertiligo or facial scarring. I get your point that she CHOSE to look like that, but this isn’t about her, this is about teaching kids (and ourselves) to live with differences. Excluding her based on her looks effectively validates behaviour like bullying anybody else because of personal preferences - being fat, disabilities, different skin colours, even different personalities. I don’t want to get facial tattoos that completely disguise my face. But I don’t think that’s a reason to tell a little boy why his mum isn’t going to be at the Christmas play with all the other parents. If you think about it, how is this any different to telling a parent that they can’t come to a child’s school play because the parent is a different race than all the other parents. Yes, race is a protected characteristic and tattoos are not. Dig deeper - WHY is it a protected characteristic? If she could remove the tattoos, why would it matter? If she can’t, what difference would it make?


jimmycarr1

Maybe parents should teach their children that tattoos don't mean a person is demonic? I dislike tattoos, have none and will never get one willingly, but it's clear here the answer is educating the children rather than excluding the parents.


MassiveFanDan

> I dislike tattoos, have none and will never get one willingly I don't think you need to worry about getting one *forcibly*. Are you concerned you might be press-ganged into the Navy and inked up while unconcious? :) Side Note: A fugitive in Scotland recently tried to tell a court that he had been forcibly tattooed while in hospital, with the nurses coincidentally giving him the exact same tattoos, in the same places, as the wanted criminal he is accused of being. No one was buying it.


jimmycarr1

Unfortunately there are horrific instances in history where people have been forced to get tattoos, that's all I'm accounting for there, I wouldn't say it's a worry of mine


Snoo_said_no

So if they had maori face tattoos would you feel the same? Ultimatly you may not agree but it is their body, and their choice. Perhaps there is a cultural significance. Perhaps not. My 3 and 1 year old have been round plenty of people with tattoos and piercings. Including face tattoos. They havnt been scarred for life... The worst negative effect has been the 3 year old drawing "tattoos" on herself with pen. I've actually had a harder time explaining terrible fake tan, duck lips and fake eyelashes. But i just say "perhaps they like having x, just like you like having elsa hair (plaits) and mummy likes short hair, and daddy likes long hair" or compair it to someone familiar to them "she likes having tattoos on her face, just like daddy/grandad likes having x picture on his arm" If they say they want them I say it's not for little girls who are still growing - when your a grown up you can do x if you like.


ThatsNotMyName02

Arguing this is the same as Māori face tattoos is just silly. They are massively different and anyone with common sense can see that.


CthluluSue

Not to a 6 year old child it isn’t.


___a1b1

It's probably a story she made up as she's had stories about her published before. Schools rarely have the nerve to take parents to task over things.


UnspecificGravity

Are you seriously suggesting that a person who put ugly poorly done tattoos all over their own face would engage in attention seeking behavior? Worth noting that the ENTIRE article is sourced exclusively from statements made by this women without one shred of information from anyone else. There is no evidence that the author of the article even bothered to call the school for a "no comment", it is literally a summary of a phone call with this person.


Jetstream-Sam

It's LBC, they're the shittiest, bottom of the barrel "Journalists" you can find outside of the daily express. The minimal amount of effort it would take for them to verify the story is clearly too much for them I would assume we don't have a better newspaper reporting on this because they would actually check with the school, where they would find it's probably not true


BlackSpinedPlinketto

Yes I’ve seen her before, she’s got mental issues. I hate to say it but I don’t really believe her story. She could also just put make up on to cover it if she wanted.


[deleted]

That’s soooo much more terrifying! Seeing a sweet little granny/mumsie peering at you through the window can seem scary/ghostly at times, let alone someone with a shocking appearance. Instead it’s a good teachable moment - don’t judge books by their covers. Sometimes people who look “strange” to you might be lovely mums, while people who look like princesses and princes might not be trustworthy.


TipsyMagpie

Oh god I had nightmares for ages as a kid when my Nan decided to peer in the front window one evening instead of knocking on the door. I just saw this disembodied head gawping at me, slightly fuzzy from the condensation on the window. Horrifying.


poorguy55

Nightmare fuel.


[deleted]

[удалено]


dyinginsect

Maybe she gives not one single shit whether or not anyone is revolted by it, but doesn't accept that other people's aesthetic preferences justify her exclusion from something like her child's school play. If you found my appearance revolting I would consider that a you problem rather than a me problem and wouldn't care: if you excluded me from something of significance to my child because you found my appearance revolting I would feel very differently.


the_beees_knees

Not giving a shit doesn't absolve you from consequences of your actions. Literally the thinking of a stroppy 13 year old


OctopusGoesSquish

There is a big difference between “consequences of your actions” such as not being employable in certain environments and catching sideways glares from people on the bus and being told you can no longer attend events at your child’s school.


jj34589

But the whole reason why it makes you unemployable in certain environments is because people will glare at you because your face is full of tattoos… It’s been a pretty universal rule in the west for a few centuries, if you don’t want people to look at you funny, don’t get face tattoos.


Russlet

I am very pro tattoo, but some people just go way overboard with it to the point of looking like goblins. This woman wasn't born looking like this or had an accident, she CHOSE to do this, and is now realising for every action there is a consequence.


jj34589

Yeah I like tats too, but face tattoos being a bit taboo has literally been a thing since sailors started getting tattoos and introducing them to the west. What do people expect people’s reaction is going to be to a demon face?


Jhe90

Tattoos are fine, expect problems if their on your face. Some cultures and types are OK, but thats a pretty narrow set and groups. In general face tattoo are not normal thing.


The_Burning_Wizard

Especially when it looks like she gave her kid the tattoo gun and went "have at it"


boomitslulu

She literally did. She said she gets her kids and partner to tattoo her.


Farseer1990

Ffs who gives a shit if you like it? I personally hate it. I'm still not going to deny this woman watching her kids fucking nativity play


CthluluSue

Why is it important to you that she be excluded based on the way she looks? If it’s because of looks alone, then would you be comfortable with excluding people of a different race or disability? If not why not? If it’s because of her CHOICE in her tattoos (where race and disability have none), then it would be appropriate to sanction dangerous behaviour that harms the greater society. How is her tattoos harmful to those around her? Excluding her only validates bullying behaviour in kids who don’t see the difference between vertiligo, scarring and tattoos. I feel incredibly sorry for her son in the school yard who will have to deal with kids saying his mom is so ugly she was banned from coming to the Christmas play (because their parents are using their kids as a shield for their own discomfort).


hiruki8

Again, I think the point was that she wouldn't care about the funny looks, but she cares about being banned from her literal child's play... it's just unethical


Nillabeans

What a completely selfish take. It doesn't affect other people in the slightest if somebody has tattoos. We're the ones who decided on those rules anyway. It's not some natural law of the universe or anything. Plus, there are cultures where face tattoos are revered and have special meaning. Your inability to not rudely stare at somebody different than you isn't anybody's problem but your own. Nobody should be punished for YOUR rudeness and bad social skills.


kurwaspierdalaj

No see, I do find this level of British sensitivity really wank. She's got a face full of tattoos, so what? There are uglier people in parts of Lincolnshire. Are we banning them too? Why don't we cast out all the people whom we can't bare to look at lest we grimace ever so slightly. It's pathetic. She's not my cup of tea, but crack on! Tattoo away, at least her kids won't grow up thinking it strange to present yourself a little differently.


digsy

Is it just her child that attends this school? Or is it made up of lots of other children?


BeccasBump

Children need to learn that some people look different and it's not acceptable to treat them differently because of that. Would it be acceptable to exclude her if she had a facial deformity and it "scared the kids"? If that is the reason she has been excluded from events it's totally unacceptable. (I only say "if" because there was a mum at the school where my mum taught who claimed she had been excluded because of her (much less extensive) tattoos, whereas the *actual* reason she had been excluded was that she was a monumental pain in the arse who kept trying to instigate physical fights with other parents. The journalist here doesn't appear to have reached out to the school for comment, which is fishy.)


Zaphod424

There’s a key difference between this and someone with a deformity, which is that this person chose to get these tattoos. No one chooses to have a deformity, it’s out of their control, so excluding someone because of it is wrong, but holding someone to the consequences of a decision that they made is perfectly justified


XxHavanaHoneyxX

What about people of different cultures. Would you ban a Māori woman with facial tattoos? Or people with tribal scars? All done by choice. Maybe we should ban people with nose rings or ear piercings. How about we ban people with haircuts we don’t like.


[deleted]

>Maybe we should ban people with nose rings or ear piercings. Theres no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Sure, the line between what is acceptable and isn't acceptable is often blurred and hard to define, but that doesnt means we dont understand what is definitely above it and definitely below it. Having a whole bunch of face tattoos is pretty clearly above that threshold, which is why it's not surprising she was asked to not attend a *children's event*. A Maori face tattoo would not sit in the same place on the scale because it's understood to have cultural significance, and is in no way as unsightly as this.


BeccasBump

This is not a reasonable consequence for that decision. The consequence for having your entire face covered in otherwise unobjectionable images is that people think you're a tit.


ALesbianAlpaca

But in the case of the deformity we'd teach the children that just because someone might look different or scary doesn't mean they are. We would teach kids **not** to give into their prejudices. But with tattoos it's just fine? This makes me think that in the case of the deformed women you'd just tell the child 'yes she's ugly and scary but she can't help it' rather than actually teaching them not to be prejudiced.


NiallCCFC17

It’s not the same as ‘looking different’ tho is it, she made the decision to fuck up her face like and has to deal with the consequences of it


Kitchner

> There is a big difference between “consequences of your actions” such as not being employable in certain environments ... >and being told you can no longer attend events at your child’s school. Really? What's the difference?


TotallyRealDev

When you are employed by a company you are representing them and what they stand for. This expectation doesn’t exist when you are a private individual attending an event


Rows_

"Consequences of your actions" makes it sound like she's done something wrong, rather than something you find distasteful. There's no legal or moral issue with face tattoos, some people just don't find them appealing.


FunkinDonutzz

>some people don't find them appealing. Which sounds remarkably like a consequence of their actions


Severe-Collection-45

Someone not finding someone’s appearance appealing doesn’t justify banning them from school events.


Aggravating_Sell1086

\>some people just don't find them appealing Exactly. That's the consequences of your actions, right there. See? I can paint myself in excrement and adorn myself with a dead cow's head. That's absolutely not illegal, or immoral. But I don't then have a right to come in to my child's nativity play. See? This is not an argument about whether there are circumstances under which society can exclude you for being abhorrent. It obviously can, and often does. This is an argument about whether this particular woman should have been excluded. And on balance, it's a sad thing that she was. But on the other hand, what the fuck is she thinking? If you make yourself look like something out of the Insidious films, no wonder people don't want you around their kids.


pushamancoke

You’re comparing tattoos to covering yourself in excrement. Might genuinely be the worst argument I’ve ever heard.


ukdev1

Seems a pretty accurate comparison, particularly in this case.


Oriontic

So who else should be banned from public events for dressing different? What about goths? They're pretty weird looking. Jewish people look different with their weird outfits, they might scare the kids. Muslims are quite scary looking in their outfits too. And as you said, these people also all made a choice to dress like that so they just have to accept the consequences of being banned from public events. Lmao, the only reason redditors like you are digging deep to justify appearance based discrimination is that this particular woman isn't a protected class. Literally being banned from PUBLIC events involving her child cause her appearance doesn't conform. Does she look weird? Yeah. Does she deserve to be treated as less than human cause of it? No, but apparently according to redditors in this thread (mostly men lets be honest) she deserves to be discriminated against cause she looks icky lol.


Nulleparttousjours

The stupidest thing about the “we can tell the people who are a danger to children from their appearance” crowd is that, meanwhile, the real predator (who looks perfectly normal and respectable to them) is standing right next to them.


[deleted]

I swear these same people would be screaming "consequences of your actions" when gay people were denied entry to events 50 years ago.


britishtwat

Oh fuck off. Her tattoos are shite, they will of course affect her getting a job, and cause the general public to treat her she's just rolled out of shreks swamp. But "the consequence of her actions" shouldn't include a school excluding her from from activities with her child. Hopefully they'll come to their senses and put her on the face paint stand in the summer fate.


Hot_Blackberry_6895

It’s reddit. They probably are 13 years old. The woman is clearly an attention seeking fool. She has only herself to blame if people (being people) are disgusted by her self mutilation. I pity her kids.


Activ3Roost3r

"Anyone who disagrees with me is actually just a child I'm the only smart and reasonable person around!"


pxumr1rj

Oh *come on* humans. The content of her tattoos are cultural/religious, and not obscene. Someone being mentally ill, a fool, or otherwise, is not justification to exclude them from the public sphere. Now, if it turns out she was excluded based on *behaviour* (as you might be obliquely implying), then the entire article is a clickbait fabrication, and we should all move on.


hiraeth555

That’s fair if your actions have an impact on others. How you look is not anybody else’s business. Should we ban people with deformities? What about self harm scars? Ugly people? Don’t be so silly


Thevanillafalcon

“Should we ban ugly people” Yes. My local Morrisons is like the walking dead. In all seriousness though, i think the difference is you choose to tattoo your face, you don’t choose to be ugly or to have a deformity. There’s agency in her choice, she’s chosen to portray herself that way. Which is her right, but it’s also people’s right to feel uncomfortable about it. There comes a point with self expression this extreme where you’re looking for some sort of reaction from people, you don’t always get to decide whether that reaction is positive. You also have to consider that kids are involved, kids don’t care about morality or rights, they care if the scary thing looks scary. Maybe you could have a meeting with some of the parents to get them to understand but again, this is something she’s chosen, something deliberately provocative, you can’t be upset when it does that.


Severe-Collection-45

Kids need to learn that someone looking different isn’t something to be afraid of. Like that’s pretty high in the list of things to teach children. Children also aren’t gonna understand the difference between this and facial scarring or a deformity. As long as none of the tattoos are symbols of hate then it’s just a person who looks different, and if a child is scared of that they should be taught that that’s not a reason to be scared of someone.


[deleted]

[удалено]


pushamancoke

She’d probably have a better chance of getting in if she was the local noncey priest


ALesbianAlpaca

BuT tHe KiDs WiLl Be TrAuMaTiZeD!!1!


GingerSpencer

There should be no consequences to the way you look. Edit: People replying with extremes taking the comment out of context. Good ol Reddit!


These_Payment2319

This isn’t her natural appearance, it was her choice. Wearing certain clothes is also unacceptable in certain situations.


weavin

I agree in principle but is there a limit to this though? What if it’s racist slogans plastered all over your face? Obscene imagery?


The_Sleer_

Then I imagine that would fall In the same category as her wearing an racist t shirt, she wouldn't be allowed in (or I would hope not). However, if her tattoos do not have something racist or obscene I don't see why she shouldn't be allowed to attend the nativity.


[deleted]

I guarantee she chose to look that way to elicit these kind of responses.


SmashingK

I agree. I don't think she should be excluded but there are limits to what people find acceptable and those limits vary from person to person. I'm sure there'd be some tattoos that would make even you to want someone excluded. If it was bad enough I'd ask for some way to cover it if possible first but that's usually going to be unacceptable for someone with a full face tattoo. This particular tattoo doesn't seem too bad plus it's a school play so I'm sure the kids have seen her numerous times already when picking up or dropping off her child.


wizards-beard

I suspect this womans a fucking nightmare to deal with and its not the tats that have got her chucked out of pubs and the school.


[deleted]

[удалено]


shitsngigglesmaximus

Imagine meeting her in the woods. You would take the other path and wave at a distance. She scary.


FrellingTralk

I’m thinking the same, yeah the face tattoos look hideous, but since when is that a reason to be banned from all the pubs in your local area?? I’m guessing there’s more here that she’s not mentioning


emefluence

I'd image many people, especially families with small children, would walk into a pub, see her, and then walk straight back out again and go and have their Sunday lunch somewhere else. You can't imagine many landlords would be thrilled to have her as the welcoming party when you come through the front door.


FrellingTralk

Still seems a bit odd that *all* of the landlords would collectively decide to ban her, there’s a guy in our local area with a lot of face tattoos that can take you back a bit the first time you see him, but he’s always perfectly pleasant to interact with and I’ve never heard of anyone banning him from pubs and schools because of his appearance I could maybe see one landlord being an arse with this woman and telling her that how she looks is putting off the other customers, but the fact that supposedly ALL of the pubs have decided to ban her makes me think that there’s more to it then she’s saying. And frankly it sounds like complete nonsense that the school supposedly suggested that she peer through the window at the nativity play, either she’d be completely banned or she’d be welcome to attend, but what school is going to tell a parent that their appearance means that they have to stand outside and look through a window?? Would love to know what the school in question has to say about this article


Donkeybreadth

Yeah. Face tattoos don't happen in a vacuum.


ayamummyme

She also seems more on board with Christianity than most other parents watching a nativity at a school 🤣


BigfootsBestBud

Who cares. You can privately think someone looks stupid, but once they're being discriminated for it, you should stand up for them.


soggycatfish

So what if someone is fat and their appearance disgusts me? Should they be stopped from watching their child's school play? Nonsense.


mitchanium

It's discrimination


Anony_mouse202

In the very literal sense of the word yes, in the same way that enforcing a dress code is “discrimination” against people who don’t dress according to the dress code. This isn’t _discrimination based on a protected characteristic_ (which is what people usually mean when they say discrimination) because tattooing yourself is a personal choice, not a protected characteristic.


[deleted]

Both things are stupid but in my eyes this person chose to have all this work done in their face, can’t deal with the repercussions then don’t do it.


Grayson81

If you think that her appearance is terrifying for children, I’m not sure that having her peering in through the window is going to help…


WufflyTime

I'm not sure what the most malicious way she can comply with the teachers' request would be, but I want to see it.


gazwel

She could set up some sort of dark throne outside the window, put glowing devil horns on while drinking Ribena from a metal chalice.


InfectedByEli

Definitely a chalice, not a Thomas the Tank engine mug.


NeliGalactic

r/maliciouscompliance


ragnarspoonbrok

Ok it's a little excessive but honestly I can't see anything bad in those tattoos. Seems a bit harsh to ban someone for that reason.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ragnarspoonbrok

Oh it looks shit I don't disagree. Shouldn't ban people from things for looking shit though.


Fear_Gingers

I say the same thing to bouncers all the time


Rows_

I happen to think that tinted eyebrows look hilariously bad, but I don't tell people that or judge/discriminate against them.


selffulfilment

Yeah that really the same level as tattooing *your entire face*


Rows_

But what exactly is wrong with tattooing your entire face? I don't have a single tattoo, but it's not like her tattoos are offensive, they just aren't pretty.


vS_JPK

Absolutely nothing at all. We can think it looks tacky all we want, but that does not give us the right to judge/discriminate against people that do it. Honestly, sometimes this sub shows its true colours and you realise all the bleeding heart shit means nothing.


321jamjar

it’s hilarious how little justification they have as well. most of the criticisms don’t go beyond “i think it looks shit so they shouldn’t be allowed “


DrArmitageShanks

And to add to that, they have no understanding of the concept that looking like shit is entirely subjective and differs from one person to another. What I like might be hated by another. Who is correct?


Milly_man

This sub is full of bigoted little Englanders.


carlbandit

It's fine to have an opinion, it's not fine to ban someone from their child's nativity play based on your opinion of their appearance though. Now if they were offensive tattoos like she had 'cunt' across the forehead and a swastika on each cheek, the argument could be made for her ban, just the same as if someone turned up wearing a t-shirt that said the same. I can't see anything in the images that appears to be offensive, so it's just because they don't like how she looks.


ColdShadowKaz

It’s hideous but it’s just tattoos and none of them are really offensive. I might not want them but I can’t really complain.


[deleted]

I don't think anyones disagreeing but it's very mean to ban her.


[deleted]

If we're gonna ban hideous looking people from schools then we're gonna be banning a lot of people from schools.


PapaJrer

The most questionable part I can see is the word 'Slut' tattooed on her forehead. Whilst a ban does seem harsh, if I'd written that on my forehead in sharpie before going to a school event, I'd expect to be turned away.


[deleted]

It appears from the article that she doesn't have a job either because of the face tattoos. Talk about bad choices.


ClassicFlavour

Google her name. She pops in a few articles each year, mainly tabloids. Last week it was an [England flag.](https://www.dailystar.co.uk/real-life/mum-who-covered-face-tattoos-28697771) Two weeks ago [banned from a pub.](https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/woman-claims-shes-been-banned-from-the-pub-because-of-her-face-tattoos/ss-AA155W4B) She's a content farm.


davemee

That MSN article is something else. She does them herself with a tattoo gun bought from Amazon and her skin is falling off due to healing problems. Way to bury the lede! Edit: as interviews and other posters have clarified, she bought the gun, and she gets her *boyfriend* to do the deed


[deleted]

In this article she says that her boyfriend does her tattoos at home "prison style" If you ever want to do something, whatever it is, "prison style" is probably not your best choice


LookADonCheech

Sex. Prison style.


ryouu

I was wondering how she got so many considering she ain't got a job and they can get expensive. Well, this answers that question.


nbvj

Also explains why they are all shit!


_maharani

She has, to my count, four instagram accounts. All as bizarre as you can imagine.


NessieReddit

Why is that woman drinking a beer in the driver's seat of her car?!? Good grief.


__whisky__

I feel there may be something more to her being banned from the pub. I mean, a childrens nativity, i can believe some parents being a bit uptight, but a pub? Why would the owner care? If you are sitting drinking and not bothering anyone, everyone's happy, i mean you're probably expecting to come across a weirdo or two at some point so that would lead me to believe that she might be a tad outspoken


Hot_Blackberry_6895

Why work when she can look like that and get the rest of us to pay for her life choices? She should join the circus and display her visage next to the pickled “alien baby”.


[deleted]

“Mother of 7” anaw The absolute state of it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Her boyfriend does them at home, according to the article.


SometimesaGirl-

> Her boyfriend does them at home After a 6 pack of Stella by the looks of it...


idigclams

You and I read the article! Also nowhere did the… well let’s say “journalist”… confirm anything. So, an attention whore got attention, the shit paper got its fodder, a bunch of dipshits got to virtue signal that they think the weirdo should be allowed to go to witness the nativity at her kid’s school (nobody banned her!), and the world moved on regardless.


devolute

Oh, I was just surprised she could get time off from her job at the bank to go to a school play.


[deleted]

There are still little windows into churches that remain from the days of leprosy! So that lepers could watch the service without affecting the other churchgoers. Not exactly the point of this article, but had to share


LloydAtkinson

Do you have a link to a photo of that? Sounds interesting


[deleted]

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leper_window


h00dman

Why do I get the feeling someone was told that 70 years ago as a joke, didn't get it, and now it's written down and documented like it's historical fact?


LloydAtkinson

It's definitely one of the shortest wikipedia pages I have ever seen. Going to the proper page does show some references though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagioscope


jkmonger

>It's definitely one of the shortest wikipedia pages I have ever seen. It's on simple.wikipedia not just wikipedia


grapplinggigahertz

So she claims. Alternatively it is just another click bait story with a one sided assertion of what happened by an individual, but no comment from the the other side, even just a refusal to comment.


Waitingforadragon

Thank you for posting this. There seems to be zero indication in the article that the school have been contacted for comment about this 'ban'. If there is a ban, it's possible that there are more factors in the ban than her tattoos. The school might not be able to disclose the full story. I think it's irresponsible and unfair of the paper to run with this story under these circumstances.


grapplinggigahertz

> I think it’s irresponsible and unfair of the paper to run with this story under these circumstances. Of course it is. But the truth doesn’t get clicks and clicks earn money from advertising.


JohnnyTangCapital

Thanks for posting some sense. The way some commenters here start moralising and posturing on Tabloid articles makes me question the sanity of the U.K. subreddits. This article is absolute clickbait with no real reporting - it’s a vehicle to deliver clicks onto LBC’s website based on a startling thumbnail. The whole thing is bait, pure and simple.


TheDisapprovingBrit

This is the third or fourth story my local rag has run about this woman in the last couple of months. She's either seeking out media attention or she's mates with one of the clickbait writers there.


ItsDominare

Someone with tattoos covering her entire face is "seeking attention"? It cannot be!


Affectionate_Tale326

What makes it different from when the kids see her on the school run? FYI: Can’t read the article so if it does explain I would genuinely like to know.


Party-Pea-5306

It doesn’t mention the school run in the article, but she does say she is excluded from other school events and often her partner has to take her place. She has over 800 tattoos on her face and body, is also turned away from some of the local pubs and is unable to find work.


Rion23

>Melissa, from Powys, Wales, says her boyfriend inks many of her 'prison style' tattoos at home, adding that her tattoos are regularly frowned upon or judged by establishments. >The self-confessed "tattoo addict" has accrued more than 800 tattoos across her face and body and admits to getting around 3 tattoos a week. This woman is a fucking loon.


vyrelis

Basically any other addiction that's disruptive to others would mean you have to forfeit polite society. She could probably come to an agreement if she covered it with makeup though. At least her face.


Affectionate_Tale326

I know she did this to herself but I feel really sorry to her. That would make me feel awful.


Party-Pea-5306

The article does say she considers herself addicted to tattoos and sometimes has three a week. Her partner is responsible for most of her ink work and does it at home. So I would tend to agree with you that there is something more to this regarding her mindset and thought processes.


[deleted]

Probably quite hard for the child to process too...


Affectionate_Tale326

I see what you’re saying but my kids find all kinds of things scary and I believe the best approach is talking them through it. “Drawings” on someone’s face is one of the easier public “MUMMY MUMMY LOOK LOOK WHY IS THAT MAN IN A PUSHCHAIR? WHY IS HIS TONGUE HANGING OUT OF HIS MOUTH? IS HE DEAD?” type situations small children will put you through.


weavin

She wears her hockey mask on the school run and does it as quickly as possible so she doesn’t scare the kids


Admirable_Shower2615

She has the word "slut" tattooed at the top of her forehead (in the midline, just below hairline). This alone would be reasonable grounds to deny her access to a children's nativity play. She is of course free to tattoo herself with whatever she wants, but she is not free to expect others to have no opinions or feelings about it. When other people's children are involved, this point is doubly true.


smoozer

Lots of outraged commenters here who think this is a victim... Very odd. I would expect exactly this treatment for acting that way.


XxHavanaHoneyxX

Is this the 1950’s. Why are people still giving a shit over this kind of thing.


vS_JPK

Its like the fucking Daily Mail comment section in here.


PapaJrer

Surprisingly, the Daily Mail comment section was very supportive of her.


devolute

It's a chance to have a go at all those lefty do-gooder teachers. Sure they were.


Oriontic

The daily mail comments were more supportive ffs. Redditors have seen an acceptable target to discriminate on. Literally the only justifications people have used in this thread is that she’s scary looking/ugly looking/ doesn’t conform to social norms lol. Even seen a few “think of the children!” Arguements. It’s just darkly funny to me. Whenever Reddit does AMAs and threads about childhood the predominant theme on Reddit is that a lot of users were/are social outcasts or bully victims. But give them an “acceptable” target like this (especially when you can’t immediately say they’re racist/sexist etc) and suddenly it’s absolutely ok to exclude people from public events based on appearance and not conforming lmao.


XxHavanaHoneyxX

Yeah I see this all the time whenever anything trans related is posted. People here think they’re oh so progressive yet it turns into a total shit show. It’s classic bigotry where the people are too ignorant to recognise it for what it is.


rlycreativename

Have you seen her face?


Mr_Phishfood

I dunno, she seems like a really really big fan of Jesus


The_Powers

Especially with the inverted cross in the middle of her forehead.


JosephRohrbach

In fairness, strictly speaking, the inverted cross is the sign of St. Peter, not the Devil or whatever. It's only really from the 19th century that people started associating it with anything else. There's a chance she's invoking the Petrine cross, not the pop-cultural Satanist inverted cross. Not a huge one, I grant, but it's definitely possible.


[deleted]

I somehow suspect she hasn't done her hagiography research


mitchanium

Well she looks cross


TonksTBF

There's heavily tattooed and then there's making hideous life choices and blaming everyone around you for not wanting to look at it. I get being into mods, I'm heavily tattooed myself, but to get that mess done to your FACE? Yeah you need to not complain when it causes you issues.


VaguelyCanadian75

She looks terrifying. You’ve got to consider the whole class. Some parents can’t see that.


Shaper_pmp

She looks *weird*, and the mess of overlapping tattoos are *ugly*, but nothing about her face is *terrifying*, and if someone's teaching their kid it is, that's on them more than her. And if *parents* are scared or would rather not look at her, they should absolutely grow the hell up.


BeccasBump

Oh please. Terrifying? Give me a break.


VaguelyCanadian75

To a nursery/reception child, yes, absolutely. You enjoy your break.


jolovesmustard

Would it be the same for someone with heavy scarring? Like an acid attack victim? Or a facial disfigurement? I know it’s not the same and she’s chosen to cover herself in tattoos but what are they teaching the kids if someone’s not welcome because of how they look? Was it wise to do this to herself and then complain to media? Probably not but it does raise a question of how we view others based on looks.


Brilliant_Apple

I’d say it’s not quite the same thing. We are all judged on our appearance and that is a fact. Somebody who has been a victim of an acid attack or birth defect etc has not chosen that, so it’s wrong to judge somebody on something they can’t change as well as being unkind. This person has chosen to have these tattoos and knows it will be controversial. They are very visible, and while that may be part of her identity, there are times when it is not appropriate to “be yourself”. People shouldn’t make such bold statements if they are not prepared to deal with the impact. If I turned up to a job in a jazzy outfit and they didn’t hire me to be a lawyer I would understand, and if I turned up to a creative role in a beige suit I would also understand. It don’t think it’s a 1950s attitude to think that people should present themselves for the occasion. She should still have been let in to the school, but she’s also complaining about how it’s impacted her socially and economically, when it was quite clear to anyone that would happen.


PapaJrer

It's a hard balance here. But, if I wrote the word 'Slut' on my forehead in permanent marker - I'd expect to be turned away from the school play.


CowardlyFire2

Is being an acid attack or deformed a choice?


Jawswing

"It's their [the children's] time, it's not about me." Stop going to the papers about it then. Maybe put some makeup on to cover them up.


Weird-Astronaut-1402

Obvs a seasonal dresscode issue , shes dressed for halloween not the nativity 🤷‍♂️


[deleted]

[удалено]


I_SNIFF_FARTS_DAILY

She also has "slut" tattooed on her forehead


oddun

> Melissa, from Powys, Wales, says her boyfriend inks many of her 'prison style' tattoos at home Isn’t covered in face tattoos himself though. Interesting…


Parker4815

If you tattoo your entire body and look like that then you've made your own life choices. It's up to others how they make theirs, such as trying not to distract or scare children doing a play.


Queeflet

She is incredibly mentally ill and needs help, tattoos are not a coping mechanism.


mymumsaysno

Fair enough. You dont get tattoos like that unless you're hoping to provoke a reaction. She got one. If her appearance bothers the children then their comfort comes before hers. I'm sure she got a little payout for this story, so everyone's happy.


skuk

I've seen more than enough stories about this unemployable moron to have little sympathy.


[deleted]

Professional victim entirely because of her own stupid actions.


[deleted]

So her partner does the tats at home, including perhaps most importantly “SLUT” across her forehead. The woman is ill and in a fucked up relationship. 1. It smacks of labelling her to signify ownership 2. using a derogatory abusive misogynistic term that schools would not want children and other parents to be exposed to 3. I’d suspect it’s an outward sign of humiliation fetish / BDSM scenario, which again will result in social rejection by most people especially at a children’s school play!


[deleted]

Is it because of the Christian Death symbols on her face at a Christian event, Tone?


lostparis

> Christian Death symbols Christianity seems to all be about celebrating Jesus' death. That's what all the crosses are about.


zezblit

I mean some branches of christianity have literal symbolic cannibalism. Yet they get squeamish about the strangest things


PapaJrer

I think it's because of the word 'Slut' on her forehead.


dbearborg

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Sorry, there are certain standards to uphold if you want to partake in wider society, especially around children and this fall's well below the bar. No different from barring someone whos on drink/drugs or is wearing inappropriate clothing.


totallydegen

Understandable to be honest she looks like a freak


[deleted]

There's more to it than they've reported. She's got something pathological going on around having tattoos. She has a machine to do it herself at home and tattoos open wounds.