****ing hell, a 2 for 1 thread thread. 1. Well, aye ir na? 2. Were the school correct? A trainee teacher claims she was sent home on the first day of her new job because she's covered in tattoos. Charlotte Tumilty said St John Vianney's Primary School in Hartlepool told her the body art on her hands, neck and feet was unacceptable. She was sent away and told she could only return once her tatts had been covered up â which the mum-of-two says is impossible. http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2014/10/22/trainee-teacher-sent-home-over-tattoos/?ncid=webmail4 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...atholic-school-arms-neck-covered-tattoos.html please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
Nah, seems to be alright now. It was probably that dog ****ing porn I posted on the snooker forum that done it.
1. Aye, but I'd have a good wash afterwards 2. Naw, as long as she was wearing more teacherly clothing, I don't see the issue.
1. Well, aye ir na? It's a 'no' from this incorrigible onanist. Not a fan of tats or piercings. 2. Were the school correct? My head says they're wrong, my gut says they're right.
1.Aye but the lights turned off. 2.This strict Catholic says the head was right,down with that sort of thing.
Charlotte added: "It ticks me off. They prejudiced me because they could see a few tattoos." Hopefully she's not teaching English or Grammar
The tattoo on her neck would suggest she's a mason which would mean she's probably a slutty hun so this Wee Free is out.