Are there any Bravehearts remaining?

[Departed Member]

In reading over the http://www.kiltmen.com site I was perplexed somewhat by some of the phraseology used. On the one hand, they're supporting the notion of getting out of trousers, yet on the other hand restricting things to narrow boxes. In particular, I found http://www.kiltmen.com/freestyle.htm distressing because it overloads the notion of freestyle with various ideals that most of us here don't subscribe to. The text may be an echo from the past, but it's still a disturbing reminder that tolerance may not be universal. If the two factions can't resolve the differences then the tension is holding everything back.

By and large, I tend to agree with much of what the article has to say. Much of it holds good, five years on. What foxes me, is the (to me) totally incorrect useage of the word 'transgender' by the author. Transgender means exactly what it says on the box, folk wishing to BE/BECOME a member of the opposite gender to that which they were born. I cannot imagine any trangendered person behaving in the manner described.

I do, however, understand the frustration felt by the author in regard to the more, shall we say, outspoken advocates of (Full Fashion Freedom). There's little more damaging to the concept of general tolerance (to be followed by acceptance?) of gentlemen adopting unbifurcated clothing as a clothing option, than to see some bloke tottering about on high heels, in a frilly frock - whether or not, he is claiming to be doing so as a man!

The Atrium used to cater quite adequately for folk of that disposition. However, it seems to have fallen by the wayside(?), having already split from Tom's Cafe, years ago, because of the irretrievable differences between the aims of those concerned. Can the two factions successfully co-exist, and achieve their respective 'targets'? Frankly, I doubt it. Although there are a few individuals (on the Freestyle 'bus') here who could claim to have achieved their objectives, how bothered are they in respect of what other chaps may wish to achieve? And be accepted for?

[cessna152towser]

Well I would probably rate myself as a Braveheart as I generally wear traditional tartan kilts. Though I have gradually progressed through an all black wool kilt, a cotton cargo kilt, a denim Union kilt to the point that I have recently bought my first denim skirt - made for men by Midas Clothing - and have ordered a second one. I regard the denim skirt as dresing down from the kilt into something more practicable on a windy day. So far, in five denim skirted outings, only three people have commented, all of them positive and all of them referred to it as a kilt.
Wearing a kilt has made me more tolerant of others' clothing choice. Although I prefer to see floral prints and frilly petticoats being worn by bonny lassies, I wouldn't criticise a guy for choosing to wear floral prints and frills if thats what he feels good with.

[JRMILLER]

Yes, it's funny how your perspective changes once you step into this world. I have a lot more sympathy and tolerance of others too. Perhaps skirt wearing comes complete with a life lesson.

I did not intend to stir up a controversy with this thread, I had simply noticed that by people's posting comments, it appeared that the "dyed in the wool" (arrg) Bravehearts were no longer with us. Perhaps instead, it's that the Bravehearts that we do have are simply more tolerant of other people's choices. That, of course, would be a good thing.

[Peter v]

I'm not sure that "leading edge"/"trailing edge" is the best way to put it. Certainly freestylers are more "adventurous" in what they're willing to try whereas the braveheart faction is content with established looks, garments, and trends. In this context, yes, the freestylers are pushing the boundaries (sometimes hard enough to make the bravehearts nervous), but that will eventually be to everyone's benefit; witness the arrival of non-traditional kilts in solid colours and "new" fabrics, for instance. That would not have happened without someone shoving up against the boundaries and using some imagination.

Personally, I'd like to see more effort go into expanding the range of fabrics that it's "acceptable" for a guy to be seen in; the seeming constant focus on denim bothers me a bit. Why shouldn't a guy be seen in velvet or silk? Even flowing silk trousers would make for a nice break with what's available now (think an updated version of the "palazzo" style that was popular in the '90s but reworked to work with a man's body type). How about lace as a trim at the collar or cuffs?

Thank you, crfriend, I too see the very fact that ALL men wearing skirts should become accepted rather that one or a few defined skirt types, just creating even more boxes to fit into. Any new box created for the reassurance of the non skirt wearing public, should be one of skirt wearing men, in all their nuances. Contrary to what I often read, I think that freestylers do no harm to the cause what so ever, only good. It would be harmful to specify very finely one soort of skirt, ie, the kilt, in traditional known configurance, thereby leaving no room at all for anything else.

People accept what is presented to them, and explained to them. No need to specify any of that in minute details and categories.

When people get accustomed to accepting men wearing one type and colour of skirt, all other options will be out of the box. Those who wear anything else, and therefore not accepted by the rules we have just been so precice in teaching them, will be just as unaccepted then as is now the case. There is no winning in that.

Getting people aware of the fact that men wear skirts, all soorts, and that it is part of a new found freedom to dress that way they want to, can I believe be done in one throw. Don't make it any more difficult than neccessary for them. Give people an easy option to learn. That there are more and more men comming up for them selves, and discovering the freedom that "freestyling" can give, that they present themselves to the world as them selves. That some men do like wearing skirts, and clothing themselves more boldly than before. That people are not made in factories, are not all the same product. That there is nothing wrong with being an individual. Just telling the public that men wear skirts alone is not giving the public the full picture. Understanding that men finally dare to break with convention, go their own way, skirt wearing being an important part of that, is giving the public the "tools" with which they can easily explain any "for them out of the ordinary" behaviour with regards to appearance.
In that regard, men wearing heels will not be any harm at all. They are just at one end of the spectrum and men very manly in a "manly" skirt at the other. Don't entice cramped thinking on the part of the general public, but open mindedness.

I also like your ideas about alternative clothing. To choose conventional clothing with a skirt is your personal choice as an idividual, but there is so much more. Stepping out of the box can entail very much more.

For those who dare, who want more than was "allowed" before and have made the step out of the box, why not be more free with clothing, like for instance your suggestion of lace. If you like, forget about lace being something erotic to the man's brain, see it as I think many women see it, as a very nice, fine finnishing touch, refinement to any garment. Once you start thinking along those lines, just as we all have stepped over the thought that skirts were only for women, then it is not so much "Femme" ( Old name ) as us being an appreciator of refined clothing. The possibilities are endless for those who are willing to seek them.

I see this as the evolution of freedom of the way men dress themselves. With there in men stepping only over the fence around the box, and others going completely out of sight, leaving the box far behind them. All are equal, all are free, and no one of them has to do anything from the other. All are skirt wearers. All are enjoying their new found freedom, with the common denominator being skirts, but to the better informed, all are freestylers, in comparison to men who just wear what men are thought to wear by convention. ( Of which there is nothing bad about, it is also their choice to do so. )

Note: Because kilts are skirts worn continually by men throughout the centuries, historically bound, and recognised as men's wear, they do have a special place on their own. But with regards to men who wear kilts now and are not traditionaly bound, by herritage, ancestory etc, I would add those new kilt wearers to the Clan of modern day skirt wearers, wearing a skirt with traditional roots. The kilt then being just one of the many skirts suitable for men. Brave hearts are of course I think a group of enthousiasts that are busy creating a kilt "Clan" anno 2007 with a recognisable look look bound with that, and being recognised as such. That is great. Just like Gothic skirt wearers are recognised as such, but still all are skirt wearing men.

With regards to Scotthish history, and kilts, etc, I know very little about that and do not wish to discuss that in detail here, thank you.

Peter v

[Bob]

Perhaps instead, it's that the Bravehearts that we do have are simply more tolerant of other people's choices. That, of course, would be a good thing.

I would agree. I might also point out that the "militant freestylers" --- those who for one reason or another insist that everyone else think and dress like they do --- aren't here either. Every now and then, we've had some come through, and peace is usually restored when they decide to leave.

So tolerance and diversity are required on all sides.

[knappen]

It is nice to have a choice and not be put in any box. Usually thats where u are put when someone wishes to bury u. Learning to let others be themselves has been a great life lesson. Knappen

[ziggy_encaoua]

Personally I don’t like terms such as Braveheart & Freestyler being as both labels are applicable but then not applicable but am I comfortable with being masculine? Well the answer is yes

[Peter v]

It is nice to have a choice and not be put in any box. Usually thats where u are put when someone wishes to bury u. Learning to let others be themselves has been a great life lesson. Knappen

That's all too true.

Peter v

[Peter v]

Personally I don’t like terms such as Braveheart & Freestyler being as both labels are applicable but then not applicable but am I comfortable with being masculine? Well the answer is yes

You are right to question these terms, if we don't like the things they suggest, then we must make work of it to either replace the meaning of them, or replace them with words that precicely describe what is going on in our neck of the woods, skirt wearing etc.

Peter v

[beverlonian]

I'm most definitely "Braveheart" - but that may be because I'm not "Brave" enough!