A woman in her 60s with a medical condition is the latest to hit the news for being denied service at a pub, for having tattoos unsympathetically interpreted as problematic.
63-year-old Kerrie Ashby has alopecia (medical hair loss) and opted to have a mandala tattoo inked below her receding hairline. She also has a sea creature on her neck, which she got for her 60th birthday. Ashby concedes she is accustomed to people looking at her, and maintains that it doesn’t bother her.
At the Colley Hotel in Glenelg with a friend earlier in October, Ashby was asked to leave by a manager – because the owners have a policy against facial tattoos.
Considering herself well dressed and not troublesome, always respectful and having been to the pub since the current owners took the reins without issue, Ashby says she was shocked, “gobsmacked” rather than angry, and also a little humiliated.
She posed how would such a rule be enforced, in an era of people with tattooed eyebrows, and eye- and lip-liner.
The Colley’s website outlines a dress code specifying that no “intimidating, aggressive or offensive” tattoos or clothing are permitted, and specifically “Please note that persons with facial tattoos are not permitted to enter the venue”.
The pub clarifies that patrons may have facial tattoos if they have religious or cultural significance, or if they cover them, explaining that the policy is about ensuring that all “guests, community members and families feel safe”.
A spokesperson for the hotel told Newscorp he invited Ashby to return, offering they will be able to come to a solution.
It is within the scope of management of a licensed premise to reserve the right to refuse entry or service to any person they deem unsuitable.
A number of pubs maintain a stance on denying people with tattoos ‘above the shoulder’ – noting that these are viewed “as increased intimidation” even when compared to other body art.
But the ever-increasing frequency of tattoos, particularly amongst younger people, with one in four Australians now sporting ink, is forcing public houses to reconsider whether or not banning tattoos is still relevant.
