Woman Removed From Legoland For Tattoo

Was Legoland in the right or the wrong for kicking out this woman with a racy tattoo?

They were in the right.	65.6%	[ 99 ]
They were in the wrong.	19.9%	[ 30 ]
Indifferent/I don't know.	14.6%	[ 22 ]
Total Votes:			[ 151 ]

[Mister George Kapland]

fwiqua

And if she knew she was going to a family-friendly place, why not cover it up beforehand? Is she just that dumb and ignorant? If I had any kids I wouldn't want them seeing that, and I'm pretty sure all the other parents who were at Legoland that day felt the same way. I mean really, who'd want to have to explain what was going on in that tattoo to their kids??

Explain what? What you seen the tattoo? It's literally tink. Tits. A light switch in the background. If you didn't tell me, it was tink banging a light switch, I would of assumed naked fairy sitting on a light switch.


So, the most you'd have to explain, because...You know, kids are just so into looking at ******** tattoos on legs at goddamned LEGOLAND. Because, obviously, legoland is so thrilling that people are going to be distracted by a chick with a leg tat in shorts. Obviously. Anyway, I digress. The most you'd have to explain is "Mommy, why'd that lady have a naked fairy on her leg?"

To which the proper response is "It's a tattoo, people get tattoo's all the time for silly reasons"

I'm not quite sure what child you think would go "Hey Ma! Why's Tinkerbell shoving a lightswitch up her a*****e!?"

[Kaiser Khorosho]

Mister George Kapland

Kaiser Khronos

She got a refund, she shouldn't be bitching. Its a tattoo of TINKERBELL GETTING OFF ON A LIGHTSWITCH. She should have covered it up if she was going into an area full of little kids. I could care less that she HAS the tattoo, but think that its utterly STUPID that she think she's being discriminated against.

Discrimination should ONLY be valid if someone can do NOTHING to prevent the discrimination, that is their sex, age, race. If she had even the slightest inkling of "HMM...I wonder if children could be offended by this?" she should have covered it up.

Name one child that has ever been offended by sex. A concept, they don't understand. Nudity they can understand. Nudity is what's being shown. Sex, they do not understand. To suggest that somebody should have to cater to you, to your needs, when they're being a good mother to their child, suggests that you don't have a grasp of the obvious.

Quote:

Nudity CAN be art, but not all nudity IS artful, or tasteful. I could care less that she has that tattoo. I'm EXTREMELY overweight and I ALWAYS wear a shirt when I go to the beach or in a pool. Why? I don't want anyone to look at what I KNOW they don't want to look at.

Oh, my goodness. I see what the root of the problem is. You feel that because you're insecure about your body image, that she should be insecure about hers. That she should cover up to prevent giving offense to people, because you feel that you give offense.


Well missy, walking in somebody elses shoes means that you have to actually remove all your pre-existing prejudices and look at the facts:


A) It was a hot day. She wore shorts.
B) She had a tattoo that depicted nudity, and has had it for several years.
C) She has never been asked to leave anywhere, based on her tattoo's.
D) She was taking her child on a day trip,
E) She was removed from the park, with her child, after 10 minutes. With out being asked if she could cover up her tattoo.
F) There was little to no explaination as to why, or what her other options could be instead of leaving.

Using these facts, I'm going to have to conclude that:

A) She was being a good mother.
B) There was no reason to consider that the tattoo was inappropriate.
C) The park acted unprofessional, however within their own rights.

Fun time. I don't post often in the ED.

Children offended by sex? Hmm...victims of sexual assault? There are also kids who need therapy from walking in on their parents having sex; whether it was because they thought "daddy was hurting mommy" or some other reason I won't get into.

Quote:

To suggest that somebody should have to cater to you, to your needs, when they're being a good mother to their child, suggests that you don't have a grasp of the obvious.

How come just taking her kid to Legoland make her a good mother? The fact that she's making a big deal out of this victimizes the kid. I mean C'MON! I'm sure the kid has been like "Mom, can we go back to Legoland? Can't you just cover up your tattoo so we can go back? PLEEEEAAASE?" The kid will probably be picked on for YEARS to come because of her mom's behavior.

Quote:

Oh, my goodness. I see what the root of the problem is. You feel that because you're insecure about your body image, that she should be insecure about hers. That she should cover up to prevent giving offense to people, because you feel that you give offense.

I'm fat. I cover up for consideration for others and because I'm modest. I always have been. I don't relate to her in the sense that she SHOULD be insecure. I cover up for the consideration of others as well as myself. I also wear a shirt so I don't have to put on sunscreen all over my body. Takes a lot less time to just put on a shirt.

spokeswoman Kelle Jackson

As a family attraction geared to children three to 10 years old, our entrance policy guidelines allow our staff the absolute direction to refuse admission to guests wearing clothing or images on their person that are offensive in nature. The Duty Manager onsite acted in accordance to this policy, and offered the guest a refund or tickets to return another day with the graphic tattoo covered. Our offer to return to the attraction with complimentary tickets still stands with the understanding of our policy.”

Her bad for not knowing/understanding the policy.

[Mister George Kapland]

Kaiser Khronos

Fun time. I don't post often in the ED.

Children offended by sex? Hmm...victims of sexual assault? There are also kids who need therapy from walking in on their parents having sex; whether it was because they thought "daddy was hurting mommy" or some other reason I won't get into.

Can't let the facts get in the way of a good hypothetical, can you?

There was no evidence of any of these scenario's and "What-if's" are the defense of a mind that has collapsed inwards on it's own preconceptions.

Quote:

How come just taking her kid to Legoland make her a good mother? The fact that she's making a big deal out of this victimizes the kid. I mean C'MON! I'm sure the kid has been like "Mom, can we go back to Legoland? Can't you just cover up your tattoo so we can go back? PLEEEEAAASE?" The kid will probably be picked on for YEARS to come because of her mom's behavior.

Yeah, I'm sure a 6 year old would say those exact sentences. I'm absolutely positive her child has a facebook and watches news networks. I'm absolutely positive.

neutral

Quote:

I'm fat. I cover up for consideration for others and because I'm modest. I always have been. I don't relate to her in the sense that she SHOULD be insecure. I cover up for the consideration of others as well as myself. I also wear a shirt so I don't have to put on sunscreen all over my body. Takes a lot less time to just put on a shirt.

It's also silly to take absolute strangers who have absolutely no right, or reason, to judge you into consideration.

Quote:

spokeswoman Kelle Jackson

As a family attraction geared to children three to 10 years old, our entrance policy guidelines allow our staff the absolute direction to refuse admission to guests wearing clothing or images on their person that are offensive in nature. The Duty Manager onsite acted in accordance to this policy, and offered the guest a refund or tickets to return another day with the graphic tattoo covered. Our offer to return to the attraction with complimentary tickets still stands with the understanding of our policy.”

Her bad for not knowing/understanding the policy.

Again, I'm not arguing their right to expel her. I'm arguing the appropriateness, the professionalism, and the potential harm it's doing to her child. Pay attention.

Furthermore, if you'll read the account from the woman victimized, you'd know they didn't offer her complimentary tickets. They're backpedaling now to potentially take away some of the heat they're getting.

[Kaiser Khorosho]

Mister George Kapland

Furthermore, if you'll read the account from the woman victimized, you'd know they didn't offer her complimentary tickets. They're backpedaling now to potentially take away some of the heat they're getting.

Kelle Jackson

Our offer to return to the attraction with complimentary tickets still stands with the understanding of our policy.

He said/she said. NOTHING will come of this because there are two different stories. We don't know the facts because there's no video or recording. You're going with the assumption that she's COMPLETELY 100% telling the truth. She COULD be doing this just to get attention to get back at the park. She COULD have swallowed her pride like everyone else, covered up her tattoo, and come back for free with her kid. What's the end result?

The kid doesn't get to go to legoland because her mom is blowing things out of proportion. HE'S the real victim here. Can we at least agree to that?

[Riviera de la Mancha]

Mister George Kapland

Ontological Empiricism

Mister George Kapland

Ontological Empiricism

ice queen in a dark tower

youre missing the point of my post
just because something is offensive doesnt mean that it should be removed. the people being offended can very easily look away

Ok.
So if I walk into a place with racist tattoos or other racist paraphernalia, when the place is more populated with Blacks, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, Asians, or really any people of color, then hey...I shouldn't be asked to leave, because people are being too touchy. They can just look away. emotion_awesome

Yes.

Except in the real world, that's not going to happen. People aren't impervious when it comes to offensive material, and everyone finds different things to be offensive.

Look what happened with the Jeremy Lin "c***k in the Armor" fiasco. "c***k in the armor" is a known idiom, and I believe everyone got offended for Jeremy Lin instead of the man, himself. Some people found it to be an offensive, tongue-in-cheek potshot at Jeremy's expense, and others didn't.

In middle school, at the age of 14-years-old, I had a shirt from Hot Topic that read "This sucks worst than the suckiest suck that ever sucked before." I was told to cover it (which I did) because some of the teachers found it offensive, because they're perverted. I didn't find anything sexual about my shirt, but apparently my teachers did.

There's a time and place for everything. People found Massey's tattoo highly inappropriate for a child-infested area, whether or not the children actually knew what Tinkerbell was doing.

Should Legoland have asked her to cover it with something? Maybe, but they didn't. Should Lana Massey have used her head, and thought "Hmm, maybe I should cover my tattoo, this might not fly very well in a family-oriented place"? Maybe, but she didn't.

Legoland responded to the complaints of their customers in the way they felt best, instead of accommodating to one customer.

and why should I censor myself because of other people?

If you honestly dont get that, then I assume you have some kind of mental issue that inhibits how well you interact with others or are intentionally playing dumb.

[Mister George Kapland]

Kaiser Khronos

Mister George Kapland

Furthermore, if you'll read the account from the woman victimized, you'd know they didn't offer her complimentary tickets. They're backpedaling now to potentially take away some of the heat they're getting.

Kelle Jackson

Our offer to return to the attraction with complimentary tickets still stands with the understanding of our policy.

He said/she said. NOTHING will come of this because there are two different stories. We don't know the facts because there's no video or recording. You're going with the assumption that she's COMPLETELY 100% telling the truth. She COULD be doing this just to get attention to get back at the park. She COULD have swallowed her pride like everyone else, covered up her tattoo, and come back for free with her kid. What's the end result?

The kid doesn't get to go to legoland because her mom is blowing things out of proportion. HE'S the real victim here. Can we at least agree to that?

Wow, that's a cop out "Well we don't know all the facts!"

I just listed the facts we know. Pay attention.

[Mister George Kapland]

Riviera de la Mancha

Mister George Kapland

Ontological Empiricism

Mister George Kapland

Ontological Empiricism

ice queen in a dark tower

youre missing the point of my post
just because something is offensive doesnt mean that it should be removed. the people being offended can very easily look away

Ok.
So if I walk into a place with racist tattoos or other racist paraphernalia, when the place is more populated with Blacks, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, Asians, or really any people of color, then hey...I shouldn't be asked to leave, because people are being too touchy. They can just look away. emotion_awesome

Yes.

Except in the real world, that's not going to happen. People aren't impervious when it comes to offensive material, and everyone finds different things to be offensive.

Look what happened with the Jeremy Lin "c***k in the Armor" fiasco. "c***k in the armor" is a known idiom, and I believe everyone got offended for Jeremy Lin instead of the man, himself. Some people found it to be an offensive, tongue-in-cheek potshot at Jeremy's expense, and others didn't.

In middle school, at the age of 14-years-old, I had a shirt from Hot Topic that read "This sucks worst than the suckiest suck that ever sucked before." I was told to cover it (which I did) because some of the teachers found it offensive, because they're perverted. I didn't find anything sexual about my shirt, but apparently my teachers did.

There's a time and place for everything. People found Massey's tattoo highly inappropriate for a child-infested area, whether or not the children actually knew what Tinkerbell was doing.

Should Legoland have asked her to cover it with something? Maybe, but they didn't. Should Lana Massey have used her head, and thought "Hmm, maybe I should cover my tattoo, this might not fly very well in a family-oriented place"? Maybe, but she didn't.

Legoland responded to the complaints of their customers in the way they felt best, instead of accommodating to one customer.

and why should I censor myself because of other people?

If you honestly dont get that, then I assume you have some kind of mental issue that inhibits how well you interact with others or are intentionally playing dumb.

Funnily enough my lack of a filter is exactly why I'm well respected and admired among my peers.

Sorry if that upsets a stick in the mud, like yourself.

[Riviera de la Mancha]

Mister George Kapland

Riviera de la Mancha

Mister George Kapland

Ontological Empiricism

Mister George Kapland

Yes.

Except in the real world, that's not going to happen. People aren't impervious when it comes to offensive material, and everyone finds different things to be offensive.

Look what happened with the Jeremy Lin "c***k in the Armor" fiasco. "c***k in the armor" is a known idiom, and I believe everyone got offended for Jeremy Lin instead of the man, himself. Some people found it to be an offensive, tongue-in-cheek potshot at Jeremy's expense, and others didn't.

In middle school, at the age of 14-years-old, I had a shirt from Hot Topic that read "This sucks worst than the suckiest suck that ever sucked before." I was told to cover it (which I did) because some of the teachers found it offensive, because they're perverted. I didn't find anything sexual about my shirt, but apparently my teachers did.

There's a time and place for everything. People found Massey's tattoo highly inappropriate for a child-infested area, whether or not the children actually knew what Tinkerbell was doing.

Should Legoland have asked her to cover it with something? Maybe, but they didn't. Should Lana Massey have used her head, and thought "Hmm, maybe I should cover my tattoo, this might not fly very well in a family-oriented place"? Maybe, but she didn't.

Legoland responded to the complaints of their customers in the way they felt best, instead of accommodating to one customer.

and why should I censor myself because of other people?

If you honestly dont get that, then I assume you have some kind of mental issue that inhibits how well you interact with others or are intentionally playing dumb.

Funnily enough my lack of a filter is exactly why I'm well respected and admired among my peers.

Sorry if that upsets a stick in the mud, like yourself.

Shame- your inability to answer what someone says doesnt get any respect from me?

So which is it? You suffer from some kind of mental issue that inhibits your ability to get basic social concepts, like aspergers or something, or you are playing stupid. Be glad I am giving you credit that you honestly have not earned and assume that you either lack the ability to know the answer or know the answer to your own question. Lord knows I am not that generous to alot of people.

[Kaiser Khorosho]

Mister George Kapland

Kaiser Khronos

Mister George Kapland

Furthermore, if you'll read the account from the woman victimized, you'd know they didn't offer her complimentary tickets. They're backpedaling now to potentially take away some of the heat they're getting.

Kelle Jackson

Our offer to return to the attraction with complimentary tickets still stands with the understanding of our policy.

He said/she said. NOTHING will come of this because there are two different stories. We don't know the facts because there's no video or recording. You're going with the assumption that she's COMPLETELY 100% telling the truth. She COULD be doing this just to get attention to get back at the park. She COULD have swallowed her pride like everyone else, covered up her tattoo, and come back for free with her kid. What's the end result?

The kid doesn't get to go to legoland because her mom is blowing things out of proportion. HE'S the real victim here. Can we at least agree to that?

Wow, that's a cop out "Well we don't know all the facts!"

I just listed the facts we know. Pay attention.

The fact she SAID the park didn't offer her tickets doesn't mean its true. Accepting ANYTHING in this situation at face value is not good.

Facts are:

She has what other customers in the park thought to be an offensive tattoo.
She got kicked out because of said tattoo.
The park has rules against images that are "offensive in nature."
The mom HAS A FREE PASS to go back to the park if she follows the rules.

Ergo, the mom should cover the tattoo and let her son go see Legoland.


And you should censor yourself because other people we have laws. "******** the draft" is legal, but "FIRE!" in a movie theater isn't. Why? One can cause harm. This situation can cause harm. Potential is all you need. See video.



Now, granted, THAT is an extreme. Her tattoo, while not as offensive as that video, still offended some people. The park did what was right, and that was to please a few customers over one. They did the right thing.

[Krissim Klaw]

She should have just taken a little black sharpy and drawn a censor box over the tits and crotch. Something about having a tattoo you could censor with a marker amuses me too much. rofl

[iiRawrImADinosaur]

ewwww

[daChaosKitty]

Mister George Kapland

I'm not quite sure what child you think would go "Hey Ma! Why's Tinkerbell shoving a lightswitch up her a*****e!?"

I picture, moreso, a child asking, "What is that fairy doing?" Or, in the case of 10 year-olds, they may well put two and two together on what the fairy is doing, which isn't really what a parent wants their ten year-old to be thinking about.

[daChaosKitty]

Krissim Klaw

She should have just taken a little black sharpy and drawn a censor box over the tits and crotch. Something about having a tattoo you could censor with a marker amuses me too much. rofl

That would've been intelligent and showed foresight.

[Mister George Kapland]

Riviera de la Mancha

Mister George Kapland

Riviera de la Mancha

Mister George Kapland

Ontological Empiricism

Mister George Kapland

Yes.

Except in the real world, that's not going to happen. People aren't impervious when it comes to offensive material, and everyone finds different things to be offensive.

Look what happened with the Jeremy Lin "c***k in the Armor" fiasco. "c***k in the armor" is a known idiom, and I believe everyone got offended for Jeremy Lin instead of the man, himself. Some people found it to be an offensive, tongue-in-cheek potshot at Jeremy's expense, and others didn't.

In middle school, at the age of 14-years-old, I had a shirt from Hot Topic that read "This sucks worst than the suckiest suck that ever sucked before." I was told to cover it (which I did) because some of the teachers found it offensive, because they're perverted. I didn't find anything sexual about my shirt, but apparently my teachers did.

There's a time and place for everything. People found Massey's tattoo highly inappropriate for a child-infested area, whether or not the children actually knew what Tinkerbell was doing.

Should Legoland have asked her to cover it with something? Maybe, but they didn't. Should Lana Massey have used her head, and thought "Hmm, maybe I should cover my tattoo, this might not fly very well in a family-oriented place"? Maybe, but she didn't.

Legoland responded to the complaints of their customers in the JJ JJ they felt best, instead of accommodating to one customer.

and why should I censor myself because of other people?

If you honestly dont get that, then I assume you have some kind of mental issue that inhibits how well you interact with others or are intentionally playing dumb.

Funnily enough my lack of a filter is exactly why I'm well respected and admired among my peers.

Sorry if that upsets a stick in the mud, like yourself.

Shame- your inability to answer what someone says doesnt get any respect from me?

So which is it? You suffer from some kind of mental issue that inhibits your ability to get basic social concepts, like aspergers or something, or you are playing stupid. Be glad I am giving you credit that you honestly have not earned and assume that you either lack the ability to know the answer or know the answer to your own question. Lord knows I am not that generous to alot of people.

It's quite simple, I understand what the societal norms are... And outside a business or professional situation, I don't feel obligated to follow them. I swear like a sailor, wear shirts with profanity, and the sad truth is... I don't care what strangers think about me.


for some reason, that devil may care attitude attracts people too me. My stuffy friends, consider me refreshing. My younger friends consider me outrageous, and my longest friends wouldn't have me any other way.


You see, I may not care for societal norms. That doesn't mean I don't understand them. Which is why outside of a professional situation, it's okay to let your hair down and climb a street pole.

[Mister George Kapland]

Kaiser Khronos

Mister George Kapland

Kaiser Khronos

Mister George Kapland

Furthermore, if you'll read the account from the woman victimized, you'd know they didn't offer her complimentary tickets. They're backpedaling now to potentially take away some of the heat they're getting.

Kelle Jackson

Our offer to return to the attraction with complimentary tickets still stands with the understanding of our policy.

He said/she said. NOTHING will come of this because there are two different stories. We don't know the facts because there's no video or recording. You're going with the assumption that she's COMPLETELY 100% telling the truth. She COULD be doing this just to get attention to get back at the park. She COULD have swallowed her pride like everyone else, covered up her tattoo, and come back for free with her kid. What's the end result?

The kid doesn't get to go to legoland because her mom is blowing things out of proportion. HE'S the real victim here. Can we at least agree to that?

Wow, that's a cop out "Well we don't know all the facts!"

I just listed the facts we know. Pay attention.

The fact she SAID the park didn't offer her tickets doesn't mean its true. Accepting ANYTHING in this situation at face value is not good.

Facts are:

She has what other customers in the park thought to be an offensive tattoo.
She got kicked out because of said tattoo.
The park has rules against images that are "offensive in nature."
The mom HAS A FREE PASS to go back to the park if she follows the rules.

Ergo, the mom should cover the tattoo and let her son go see Legoland.


And you should censor yourself because other people we have laws. "******** the draft" is legal, but "FIRE!" in a movie theater isn't. Why? One can cause harm. This situation can cause harm. Potential is all you need. See video.



Now, granted, THAT is an extreme. Her tattoo, while not as offensive as that video, still offended some people. The park did what was right, and that was to please a few customers over one. They did the right thing.

Wait, so we have to choose between believing a mother removed from the park... Or a billion dollar faceless.corporation that issued a statement via a PR firm.

Let's see... Lady on face book, or lady PAID to make companies look good.



Facebook lady.

Lady paid to make people look good.


Which sounds more credible.


And then you have to hall to suggest a titty tat is on the same level as shouting "FIRE" in a crowded movie theatre. neutral . Something that can cause a panic, a stampede and deaths... And comparing it to a tattoo....


it's like you we're born retarded.