To Kilt or not to kilt?

General discussion of skirt and kilt-based fashion for men, and stuff that goes with skirts and kilts.

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby weeladdie18 » Sat Aug 10, 2019 5:53 pm

Ray wrote:WL - I think I understand where you are coming from. The societal definition of a skirt does seem to be a long way from a kilt. It’s almost like comparing culottes with jeans.

Yet, like my comparison above, the two garments are part of the same group which I’d describe as skirted garments. This would also include sarongs, which are worn by millions of men. A kilt, denuded of its tartan, starts to look very much like a skirt. That’s because you can’t get away from the fact that with one barrel, not two, it’s unbifurcated.

I used to get upset when someone used to refer to my kilt as a skirt, probably with pejorative intent. Now, I just agree. Yes, it’s a skirt - but a special one!

In summary, I do agree with you - from one perspective.


Thank you Ray...One moderator safely put this baby to bed several months ago. Now a second moderator is making a suggestion which reverses the first decision.
You Ray must realise that the name used by the Highlanders for their Little Kilt in their native language is entirely different from the name used for the
Skirt worn by the female. ....why are people now trying to use an English or an American dictionary to define the Little Kilt ?

I consider that folks definition for The Kilt as worn as part of the Male Scottish National Dress is very poor. No one has explained how this
fine historical Scottish garment has become an English or American female mode of attire by definition.

No one has attempted to quote Scottish Historical Research Publications regarding this matter....I trust you , Ray , understand why I am not satisfied.

My Scottish Kilt Maker made me a new Kilt in a Shop full of Kilts in Inverness ....I bought a Government Surplus Military Kilt with its Nato Stock Number
which describes the garment as a Kilt....In the Nato Vocabulary a skirt is described as " a skirt Female "
weeladdie18
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1177
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 3:17 pm

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Ray » Sat Aug 10, 2019 10:11 pm

You mean the fèileadh beag?

No, that doesn’t mean skirt, nor does sarong or sulu, but they all belong to the same family.

To take gender/sex out of this, Wikipedia describes a skirt thus:

“A skirt is the lower part of a dress or gown, covering the person from the waist downwards, or a separate outer garment serving this purpose.

The hemline of skirts can vary from micro to floor-length and can vary according to cultural conceptions of modesty and aesthetics as well as the wearer's personal taste, which can be influenced by such factors as fashion and social context. Most skirts are self-standing garments, but some skirt-looking panels may be part of another garment such as leggings, shorts, and swimsuits.

In modern times skirts are typically worn by women with some exceptions such as the izaar which is worn by Muslim cultures and the kilt which is a traditional men's garment in Scotland and Ireland and sometimes England. Fashion designers such as Jean Paul Gaultier, Vivienne Westwood, Kenzo and Marc Jacobs have shown men's skirts. Transgressing social codes, Gaultier frequently introduces the skirt into his men's wear collections as a means of injecting novelty into male attire, most famously the sarong seen on David Beckham.”

So there you are. A kilt is, according to the globally policed Wikipedia, a skirt - but one worn by men.

Now, how have we gone from fèileadh beag to skirt? Easy. The passage of centuries. This is une bonne chose, n’est ce que pas? There’s Wiki saying “ this is a skirt - but it’s a MAN’s skirt”. No ambiguity.

Scottish historical research publications will be undoubtedly useful - in referring to history. This is now. This is the 21st Century (by the way, 21st Century Kilts’ err, kilts, are awesome garments. I have two. One was £1,200*. Worth every penny. Not tartan, mind). I’d ignore NATO definitions. Useful in the military; less so in general life. OC IC MT is well known in the military (yes, I’m ex military) but less so in reality!

The long and short of this (24 inches, I hear you cry!) is that kilts have evolved. Football fans wear nylon rip-offs; new “tartans” proliferate ( I love the name of the “thistle dubh”!), contemporary kilts lose the tartan entirely - yet they remain kilts. Upper or lower case? It doesn’t matter. We should celebrate the adoption of the garment in all its forms - to open up the door to men discovering the joy of an unbifurcated garment. For men. Also known as a type of skirt.

The Kilt will always be a defining subset of skirt. It’s culturally strong enough to stand as a branch of the skirted world. Ironically, a branch suggests bifurcation, and that’s the last thing any of us want!

Slainté

Ray

(* including waistcoat and jacket, excluding all other accessories)
Last edited by Ray on Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ray
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 976
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 7:03 am
Location: West Midlands, England, UK

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby crfriend » Sat Aug 10, 2019 11:02 pm

Bravissimo, Ray! Thanks for posting that as it clears out a lot of the fog that we all seem to get lost in from time to time.

I have precisely no problem whatsoever in recognising The Kilt as a special subtype of the skirted garment, and I have lots of respect for it -- as a "brand name" (if you will). However, to classify it as something completely separate is semantic nonsense. It is what it is -- a single topological tube down which both legs are thrust. We grant it special status out of respect.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10467
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby new2skirts » Sun Aug 11, 2019 12:11 am

Ray wrote:You mean the fèileadh beag?

No, that doesn’t mean skirt, nor does sarong or sulu, but they all belong to the same family.

To take gender/sex out of this, Wikipedia describes a skirt thus:

“A skirt is the lower part of a dress or gown, covering the person from the waist downwards, or a separate outer garment serving this purpose.

The hemline of skirts can vary from micro to floor-length and can vary according to cultural conceptions of modesty and aesthetics as well as the wearer's personal taste, which can be influenced by such factors as fashion and social context. Most skirts are self-standing garments, but some skirt-looking panels may be part of another garment such as leggings, shorts, and swimsuits.

In modern times skirts are typically worn by women with some exceptions such as the izaar which is worn by Muslim cultures and the kilt which is a traditional men's garment in Scotland and Ireland and sometimes England. Fashion designers such as Jean Paul Gaultier, Vivienne Westwood, Kenzo and Marc Jacobs have shown men's skirts. Transgressing social codes, Gaultier frequently introduces the skirt into his men's wear collections as a means of injecting novelty into male attire, most famously the sarong seen on David Beckham.”

So there you are. A kilt is, according to the globally policed Wikipedia, a skirt - but one worn by men.

Now, how have we gone from fèileadh beag to skirt? Easy. The passage of centuries. This is une bonne chose, n’est ce que pas? There’s Wiki saying “ this is a skirt - but it’s a MAN’s skirt”. No ambiguity.

Scottish historical research publications will be undoubtedly useful - in referring to history. This is now. This is the 21st Century ( bye, 21st Century Kilts’ err, kilts are awesome garments. I have two. One was £1,200*. Worth every penny. Not tartan, mind). I’d ignore NATO definitions. Useful in the military; less so in general life. OC IC MT is well known in the military (yes, I’m ex military) but less so in reality!

The long and short of this (24 inches, I hear you cry!) is that kilts have evolved. Football fans wear nylon rip-offs; new “tartans” proliferate ( I love the name of the “thistle dubh”!), contemporary kilts lose the tartan entirely - yet they remain kilts. Upper or lower case? It doesn’t matter. We should celebrate the adoption of the garment in all its forms - to open up the door to men discovering the joy of an unbifurcated garment. For men. Also known as a type of skirt.

The Kilt will always be a defining subset of skirt. It’s culturally strong enough to stand as a branch of the skirted world. Ironically, a branch suggests bifurcation, and that’s the last thing any of us want!

Slainté

Ray

(* including waistcoat and jacket, excluding all other accessories)


I have 2 kilt suits, one in tartan, one plain. Both around £900 but worth every penny. Some may call it a skirt if it's not tartan, but I don't care. One is in green tweed with a check pattern rather than tartan. I think I've seen a picture of your kilt suit, it looks very smart 8)
new2skirts
Active Member
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:33 pm

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby weeladdie18 » Sun Aug 11, 2019 1:51 am

Ray wrote:You mean the fèileadh beag?

No, that doesn’t mean skirt, nor does sarong or sulu, but they all belong to the same family.

To take gender/sex out of this, Wikipedia describes a skirt thus:

“A skirt is the lower part of a dress or gown, covering the person from the waist downwards, or a separate outer garment serving this purpose.

The hemline of skirts can vary from micro to floor-length and can vary according to cultural conceptions of modesty and aesthetics as well as the wearer's personal taste, which can be influenced by such factors as fashion and social context. Most skirts are self-standing garments, but some skirt-looking panels may be part of another garment such as leggings, shorts, and swimsuits.

In modern times skirts are typically worn by women with some exceptions such as the izaar which is worn by Muslim cultures and the kilt which is a traditional men's garment in Scotland and Ireland and sometimes England. Fashion designers such as Jean Paul Gaultier, Vivienne Westwood, Kenzo and Marc Jacobs have shown men's skirts. Transgressing social codes, Gaultier frequently introduces the skirt into his men's wear collections as a means of injecting novelty into male attire, most famously the sarong seen on David Beckham.”

So there you are. A kilt is, according to the globally policed Wikipedia, a skirt - but one worn by men.

Now, how have we gone from fèileadh beag to skirt? Easy. The passage of centuries. This is une bonne chose, n’est ce que pas? There’s Wiki saying “ this is a skirt - but it’s a MAN’s skirt”. No ambiguity.

Scottish historical research publications will be undoubtedly useful - in referring to history. This is now. This is the 21st Century ( bye, 21st Century Kilts’ err, kilts are awesome garments. I have two. One was £1,200*. Worth every penny. Not tartan, mind). I’d ignore NATO definitions. Useful in the military; less so in general life. OC IC MT is well known in the military (yes, I’m ex military) but less so in reality!

The long and short of this (24 inches, I hear you cry!) is that kilts have evolved. Football fans wear nylon rip-offs; new “tartans” proliferate ( I love the name of the “thistle dubh”!), contemporary kilts lose the tartan entirely - yet they remain kilts. Upper or lower case? It doesn’t matter. We should celebrate the adoption of the garment in all its forms - to open up the door to men discovering the joy of an unbifurcated garment. For men. Also known as a type of skirt.

The Kilt will always be a defining subset of skirt. It’s culturally strong enough to stand as a branch of the skirted world. Ironically, a branch suggests bifurcation, and that’s the last thing any of us want!

Slainté

Ray

(* including waistcoat and jacket, excluding all other accessories)


Thank you Ray for helping to clear the fog . I do not consider that Wikipedia is a sufficiently accurate scource of information to suggest that your
response is historically or academically correct....If you wish to expect me to believe the validity of your response I would expect you to make reference
to the works of two Scottish Historians whose references concur.
Any gentleman who wishes to wear the Traditional Scottish Kilt with pride would not be daft enough to suggest that he is wearing a skirt .

The issue we are debating is how The Fieleadh Beag came to be known as a skirt. It is very demeaning of you, as ex Military Personel to expect me to
believe the garbage pumped out of the internet.

Please remember that in my book military staff are not trained to an acceptable civilian standard , the military are trained to a standard which
The Military consider acceptable......Please may I remind you that I was civilian trained by a government contractor and later worked for an organisation
who used the Military as their servants....We always attempted to avoid working directly with Military Personel .

One of my interesting experiences was to sit in an old officers mess with a retired N.C.O. who trained the Raw Recruits in a Highland Regiment how to wear
their Kilts. One windy day he took his troop to a training room on the windward side of this Old Scottish Castle . On the way all their Kilts blew up around their ears.
Fortunately I passed my Kilt wearing inspection with this elderly Kilt wearing gentleman as I was not wearing a skirt.....L.O.L.
weeladdie18
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1177
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 3:17 pm

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby crfriend » Sun Aug 11, 2019 2:05 am

weeladdie18 wrote:Any gentleman who wishes to wear the Traditional Scottish Kilt with pride would not be daft enough to suggest that he is wearing a skirt .

Of course not, because he is wearing a very specific brand of skirt. This is precisely akin to me saying that I do not drive an automobile, I drive a Tesla (to pick a random high-profile brand). Not that I do, mind, I drive a Dodge (so named because of the way they enter and leave corners).

As far as the superiority you profess regarding The Kilt, please knock it off. At a fast glance a skirt and a Kilt look entirely similar; kilted skirts and Kilts especially. Enough. We understand the brand thing. We "get it". Let it drop. Please.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
 
Posts: 10467
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby weeladdie18 » Sun Aug 11, 2019 2:14 am

Folks who are interested in Scottish Military history may be unaware that the last of the Kilt Wearing Scottish Highland Regiments
employs Figian Troops who wear British Government Issue Military Kilts which are manufactured in Pakistan ............L.O.L. ........ Roderick.
weeladdie18
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 1177
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 3:17 pm

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Ray » Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:24 am

WL - my response is valid enough; it’s not a peer reviewed academic treatise, but it’s valid for the here and now. Wikipedia has links to cited references if you wish to dig deeper, but more relevantly, it tends to give a snapshot of how society sees things right now, and that is why I cited it. The same applies to the views of historians. They will be experts on the history of the kilt but that’s rather less relevant to the here and now. You might as well cite Debretts on how to wear a kilt.

As for demeaning you, there was no intent. If you take slight at my words, so be it. There’s not much I can do about that.

Regards

Ray.

Ps it’s “Fijian”, not Figian. I thought you might like the factually correct phrase.
Ray
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 976
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 7:03 am
Location: West Midlands, England, UK

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Ray » Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:18 am

New2skirts - I bet you look really dapper in them too! I’m sure I have seen a pic of you in them. You carry the look as well as your pencil skirt / tights / boots combo.
Ray
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 976
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 7:03 am
Location: West Midlands, England, UK

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Chirp » Mon Aug 19, 2019 7:11 am

I don't wear my traditional kilt very much. I perfer to wear black utility kilts. Also my wife would lose her mind if i damaged my kilt.
But my Kilt is a Kilt. If they started making a skirts that were same as my kilt for price of skirt, I would be all over that like fat kid on a cupcake,

But over the years i have been asked is that a skirt,,,, I go nope its a Kilt,
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
No one mess's with a big guy in kilt
User avatar
Chirp
Active Member
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:02 am
Location: Ont Canada

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Dust » Mon Aug 19, 2019 3:23 pm

Chirp wrote:But over the years i have been asked is that a skirt,,,, I go nope its a Kilt,

My standard response to that lately has been, "yeah, it's a kilt." This is of course wearing utility kilt. It's been the springboard for conversations about why skirts are okay for guys.
Dust
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Dust » Mon Aug 19, 2019 3:29 pm

Chirp wrote:I don't wear my traditional kilt very much. I perfer to wear black utility kilts. Also my wife would lose her mind if i damaged my kilt.
But my Kilt is a Kilt. If they started making a skirts that were same as my kilt for price of skirt, I would be all over that like fat kid on a cupcake,

I would love to see cheaper kilts and utility kilts, so long as they are quality. I've been eyeing some of the cheaper Asian import utility kilts online. From the photos, they seem to have picked up the design of some of the better ones I've got, for a bit less money. Might get one soon just to check the quality.

On the other hand, if they get too cheap, will they simply become a women's wear item?
Dust
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Chirp » Mon Aug 19, 2019 9:06 pm

Dust wrote:[I would love to see cheaper kilts and utility kilts, so long as they are quality.


There are cheaper kilts and utility kilts out there, My tartan kilt cost 800+ And my utility ones are just over 100.
I have seen good looking tartans for 200 300 range, There not traditional Sottish kilt tartans but from 20 feet u can't tell.
I have seen utilitys 40 and up range.
No one mess's with a big guy in kilt
User avatar
Chirp
Active Member
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:02 am
Location: Ont Canada

Re: To Kilt or not to kilt?

Postby Dust » Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:57 am

Chirp wrote:
Dust wrote:I would love to see cheaper kilts and utility kilts, so long as they are quality.


There are cheaper kilts and utility kilts out there, My tartan kilt cost 800+ And my utility ones are just over 100.
I have seen good looking tartans for 200 300 range, There not traditional Sottish kilt tartans but from 20 feet u can't tell.
I have seen utilitys 40 and up range.

About 5 years ago, I bought a ~$45 utility kilt, and it wasn't worth the money. I'm seeing some in that range now that look like they might be worth it and then some. But a picture can be deceptive.
Dust
Member Extraordinaire
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Previous

Return to Skirts and Kilts for Men

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 2 guests