Question

General discussion of skirt and kilt-based fashion for men, and stuff that goes with skirts and kilts.
ScotL
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Question

Post by ScotL »

Midas wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 6:11 pm
A kilt is very different from a skirt. I would never choose to wear a kilt.

If the same word were to be used for both it would be more appropriate to call all kilts skirts.

What’s wrong with calling a kilt a kilt and a skirt a skirt?
Because you’re thinking about this as someone who has accepted wearing a skirt and reject the fact that skirts are only for women.

Walk a mile in the shoes of men and women who have not accepted men wearing skirts. The easier it is for them to accept it, the better.

You are completely correct. We should call skirts skirts and kilts kilts.

But do you really care what they are called? Isn’t getting more people to accept men in skirts more important? Why worry about semantics.
ScotL
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Question

Post by ScotL »

Coder wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 6:46 pm
FLbreezy wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 5:49 pm
I suppose if calling it a kilt helps make it more beginner-friendly to the UBGCTLHOTB-curious male, then sure go for it. Heck, these people are marketing an apron to men as a kilt. Maybe it will open their eyes to other possibilities.
That's hilarious (in an ironic way - not LOL/mean). It's unfortunate they didn't have it do a full-wrap as that would be more kilt-like. You can buy additional panels to do a 360:

https://www.grillkilt.com/collections/a ... s-above-42


Looks like it has full coverage, but I'd be leery of wearing just the apron: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnw4bUneVVU

Tove Wear made a kilt version of their Maker Skirt tis past year but it's no longer on their website. Besides the expense, either they didn't sell well of they are between batches.
This kind of proves my points. What’s more manly than grilling? Manly men making fire and roasting beasts over the flame while drinking beer. Call it a grillskirt? Nope, that just wouldn’t fly. GrillKILT, ahhhh. Made for manly men. None of that girly skirt crap.
FLbreezy
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:40 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Re: Question

Post by FLbreezy »

ScotL wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 6:52 pm
But think about those who right now are not wearing them. They are not going to be instantly in favor of it not try them. They need to be eased into it. And allowing them to call all mens skirts a kilt, because of course it’s made for men and is manly, would go a long way towards acceptance.
I think actual kilts (especially utility kilts) are a good gateway drug, I mean what could be Manlier (TM) than a camo tactical kilt when you're out with your gun-toting buddies hunting down ANTIFA? :wink:

Some kilt wearers may branch out into skirts, some may not. I don't think terminology is what's holding them back though.
FLbreezy
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:40 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Re: Question

Post by FLbreezy »

Coder wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 6:46 pm
Tove Wear made a kilt version of their Maker Skirt tis past year but it's no longer on their website. Besides the expense, either they didn't sell well of they are between batches.
Damn, I'd wear either the kilt or the skirt version of that in a heartbeat...too bad they're so expensive. That'd be great for days like today when I'm doing home renovations and need extra pockets.
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1369
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am

Re: Question

Post by Coder »

FLbreezy wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 7:22 pm
Coder wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 6:46 pm
Tove Wear made a kilt version of their Maker Skirt tis past year but it's no longer on their website. Besides the expense, either they didn't sell well of they are between batches.
Damn, I'd wear either the kilt or the skirt version of that in a heartbeat...too bad they're so expensive. That'd be great for days like today when I'm doing home renovations and need extra pockets.
I’ll confess: I bought one of their skirts when they were having a sale. I’ve been wearing it while I’m working on my stairs/floor, but the pockets are a bit too tight for my liking - or maybe they will loosen up if I just use them. The side loop is perfect for a tape measure. I’ve also worn it out to work one time, but that was in the dead of winter so I wore jeggings underneath.
Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1369
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am

Re: Question

Post by Coder »

FLbreezy wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 7:22 pm
Damn, I'd wear either the kilt or the skirt version of that in a heartbeat...too bad they're so expensive. That'd be great for days like today when I'm doing home renovations and need extra pockets.
Found it - January 2021 - my sense of time is way off:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CKOrD7Lh14o/

You could always email and see if they have a sample for sale.
ScotL
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Question

Post by ScotL »

FLbreezy wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 7:18 pm
ScotL wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 6:52 pm
But think about those who right now are not wearing them. They are not going to be instantly in favor of it not try them. They need to be eased into it. And allowing them to call all mens skirts a kilt, because of course it’s made for men and is manly, would go a long way towards acceptance.
I think actual kilts (especially utility kilts) are a good gateway drug, I mean what could be Manlier (TM) than a camo tactical kilt when you're out with your gun-toting buddies hunting down ANTIFA? :wink:

Some kilt wearers may branch out into skirts, some may not. I don't think terminology is what's holding them back though.
I find skirts more comfortable than kilts. But I started with kilts predominantly because they were made for men and accepted.

Which wedding invitation is more likely to be accepted.

1. The pleasure of your company is requested. The wedding party requests compliance with the dress code for men: kilts.

2. The pleasure of your company is requested. The wedding party requests compliance with the dress code for men: skirts

It’s stupid, but words are powerful.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 13268
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Question

Post by crfriend »

I'm going to take Stu's side in this as that the kilt is a very specific type of skirt. A skirt it is, but nonetheless it has specific things about it that set it apart.

I was drawn to Stu's mention of swords, as weaponry is a favourite topic of mine, and there are myriad types of swords, all used for different purposes, in different settings, and each requiring different tactics of use., Consider the panoply of sword types, and I'm not going to attempt to get them all, but we have rapiers, sabres, cutlasses, scimitars, katanas, and a host of others. Contemplate the geometry and use-case for each of those, and you'll get an idea of what makes a kilt a kilt and not merely a skirt. If faced with something that requires blades, I'll pick an appropriate one depending on circumstance, and I've got a cutlass, a rapier, and a katana handy -- and each and every one of them are very, very different in construction. Swords, all, yes -- but very different types with different uses and very different tactics involved.

So, let';s not "dumb down" the Kilt, or try to rename it "upwards" into its parent genre; it stands as itself.

If you've got the balls to wear a skirt, you have the balls to call it a skirt.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
ScotL
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Question

Post by ScotL »

crfriend wrote:
Sun Sep 11, 2022 12:43 am
I'm going to take Stu's side in this as that the kilt is a very specific type of skirt. A skirt it is, but nonetheless it has specific things about it that set it apart.

I was drawn to Stu's mention of swords, as weaponry is a favourite topic of mine, and there are myriad types of swords, all used for different purposes, in different settings, and each requiring different tactics of use., Consider the panoply of sword types, and I'm not going to attempt to get them all, but we have rapiers, sabres, cutlasses, scimitars, katanas, and a host of others. Contemplate the geometry and use-case for each of those, and you'll get an idea of what makes a kilt a kilt and not merely a skirt. If faced with something that requires blades, I'll pick an appropriate one depending on circumstance, and I've got a cutlass, a rapier, and a katana handy -- and each and every one of them are very, very different in construction. Swords, all, yes -- but very different types with different uses and very different tactics involved.

So, let';s not "dumb down" the Kilt, or try to rename it "upwards" into its parent genre; it stands as itself.

If you've got the balls to wear a skirt, you have the balls to call it a skirt.
And I’m in complete agreement. A kilt is a specialized skirt.

But if calling all mens skirts by the name “kilt” helps other men get over themselves and try one, is it worth standing on ceremony? Is it really that important to pedantically classify the individual skirts versus humor others to fight a stupid gendered stereotype?

In the end, what is it we really want? To be accepted wearing a skirt as a man or holding on to the fact that a kilt is a subcategory of skirt which is a subcategory of unbifurcated bottoms which is a subcategory of bottoms which is a subcategory of clothing.

I’ll gladly call any skirt I wear a kilt if it makes it ok for the uninitiated.
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 13268
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: Question

Post by crfriend »

ScotL wrote:
Sun Sep 11, 2022 1:14 am
But if calling all mens skirts by the name “kilt” helps other men get over themselves and try one, is it worth standing on ceremony? Is it really that important to pedantically classify the individual skirts versus humor others to fight a stupid gendered stereotype?
I believe it is worth standing on ceremony. Ceremony preserves history. Now, much of the modern notion of kilt history only dates back to fanciful notions in Queen Victoria's age, but it stands in the modern mind nonetheless, and I believe we cheapen that at our peril. Bluntly, the Kilt is pretty much the only Proper Choice for Men in the West. (We'll leave the Fustanella out as that's Mediterranean and not really "Western".) If that brand name gets damaged it risks more than we hope to gain by compromising it. Thus I support the notion of flatly stating, "It's a skirt. Get over it."

Really, sometimes the direct method will get more traction than creative "renaming". Not to mention that the astute value directness in action vastly more than deflection. Which of the two statements below counts for more when facing down a potential opponent?

1) "It's a skirt. So what. It's comfortable and covers what needs to be covered. Try one, and trust me, your balls will not fall off."

2) "It's a skirt-like thing that the marketer called a kilt. So I'm going to go with the notion that it's a kilt."

Semantics, yes, but sometimes those are important. None of the rigs I sport are anywhere near the "Kilt" look, and I'm proud of that.

To crib the line of, "Call a spade a spade." for a moment, it's important to recognise different objects. Calling a spade a shovel merely makes one look stupid. Yes, a spade is a form of shovel, but when one has the right term it should be used.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
Ozdelights
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon May 16, 2022 1:29 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: Question

Post by Ozdelights »

Like an orange is a fruit but not all fruits are oranges similarly, a kilt is a form of skirt but not all skirts are kilts so call it what it is. I would hope that those who value the tradition of a kilt would not want all skirts for men called kilts. Aren't we trying remove the demarcation line?
User avatar
Chirp
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:02 am
Location: Ont Canada

Re: Question

Post by Chirp »

ScotL wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 1:04 pm
Would people on this cafe mind if all skirts for men were called kilts?
The prob with this idea is the Kilt is defined as a garment resembling a wrap-around knee-length skirt,
U dont find a kilt that is ankle length or tube design. This really makes other skirts for men to need some another name.
No one mess's with a big guy in kilt
Faldaguy
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:09 am
Location: Costa Rica

Re: Question

Post by Faldaguy »

Yes, I'd mind. I don't like double-speak -- it is a distortion of the truth. To call any skirt a kilt is bull, bunk, balderdash, baloney, doublespeak, drivel, gibberish, hokum, nonsense and unnecessary.

Frankly I rather enjoy the opportunity to enlighten those who complement or inquire about my "kilt" when plainly it is not a kilt but a skirt. I try to make it clear that I'm a man wearing a skirt with a simple: "It is just a skirt" if their comment seems to imply a question; but if they seem to believe it is a kilt (or sometimes I think they are trying to make me feel like a real man) by stating it is a kilt -- then I may get a bit more pedantic!

It is rare man that makes the mention anyway -- usually women. I've mentioned here before about being asked about my 'kilt' by a nurse -- she was a bit speechless when I told her it was just a skirt -- when she closed her mouth again, she said she had to say kilt because she had had men get upset when she named their garment as a skirt, & not a kilt -- even though it clearly was not a kilt.

Nor do I think calling skirts anything but a skirt is going to make two boos of difference in the number of men who take up wearing skirts. If the men are so afraid of wearing a skirt, let them start with a kilt and grow into a skirt when they mature!
ScotL
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Question

Post by ScotL »

crfriend wrote:
Sun Sep 11, 2022 1:39 am
ScotL wrote:
Sun Sep 11, 2022 1:14 am
But if calling all mens skirts by the name “kilt” helps other men get over themselves and try one, is it worth standing on ceremony? Is it really that important to pedantically classify the individual skirts versus humor others to fight a stupid gendered stereotype?
I believe it is worth standing on ceremony. Ceremony preserves history. Now, much of the modern notion of kilt history only dates back to fanciful notions in Queen Victoria's age, but it stands in the modern mind nonetheless, and I believe we cheapen that at our peril. Bluntly, the Kilt is pretty much the only Proper Choice for Men in the West. (We'll leave the Fustanella out as that's Mediterranean and not really "Western".) If that brand name gets damaged it risks more than we hope to gain by compromising it. Thus I support the notion of flatly stating, "It's a skirt. Get over it."

Really, sometimes the direct method will get more traction than creative "renaming". Not to mention that the astute value directness in action vastly more than deflection. Which of the two statements below counts for more when facing down a potential opponent?

1) "It's a skirt. So what. It's comfortable and covers what needs to be covered. Try one, and trust me, your balls will not fall off."

2) "It's a skirt-like thing that the marketer called a kilt. So I'm going to go with the notion that it's a kilt."

Semantics, yes, but sometimes those are important. None of the rigs I sport are anywhere near the "Kilt" look, and I'm proud of that.

To crib the line of, "Call a spade a spade." for a moment, it's important to recognise different objects. Calling a spade a shovel merely makes one look stupid. Yes, a spade is a form of shovel, but when one has the right term it should be used.
What is this cafe fighting for? Are we fighting for the purity of the words “kilt” and “skirt” or are we fighting for fashion freedom?

Tell a man who hasn’t felt the comfort of a skirt to “get over it” and you’re gonna lose that battle. Attacking his sense of fashion/reality will place him on the defensive and he will dig in staunchly against it.

Tell a man who who already wears and enjoys skirts that what they are wearing is a kilt and you’re gonna get an eye roll and maybe a discussion but that man will still wear a skirt.

In our own world, we can afford to be pedantic and hold to the kilts definition (which honestly, my kilts are nothing like the Scottish great kilts, but a “kilt” nonetheless). But that’s because we’ve already taken the plunge. Things look differently from where we are at.

We need to see it through the lens of how most of the population sees a skirt as womens clothing. It’s the art of compromise. Utility kilts have that imbued in their very construction. Is a utility kilt really a kilt? Why, because it has pleats on the back? Because the name says it is? Or because it looks like a masculine garment with enough similarity to a kilt to not be entirely named wrong but appeases manly mens desire to wear something unbifurcated as long as it’s not a skirt. Marketing brilliance.

People are remarkable at their ability to rationalize.

Which do you think a man who isn’t a member of this cafe will more easily tell themselves if they wear an unbifurcated garment?

1) I’m wearing a kilt which is for men

2) I’m wearing a skirt and just need to get over it, risk the possible ridicule from my friends, have no worry that people will question my sexual orientation or gender identity and quiet my inner demons who have for my entire life stated skirts are for women.

Option two is a tall order.

We need to make it easier, not harder for men to accept that a skirt is just an article of clothing. The best way to do that is by allowing them to tell themselves whatever they need to hear to accept it.
ScotL
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 12:43 am

Re: Question

Post by ScotL »

Chirp wrote:
Sun Sep 11, 2022 3:55 am
ScotL wrote:
Sat Sep 10, 2022 1:04 pm
Would people on this cafe mind if all skirts for men were called kilts?
The prob with this idea is the Kilt is defined as a garment resembling a wrap-around knee-length skirt,
U dont find a kilt that is ankle length or tube design. This really makes other skirts for men to need some another name.
Absolutely agree. A kilt does have a definition. But ask a true Scotsman if my hiking kilt from Sportskilt is a kilt and I’ve already heard the answer.

We hold to the purity of the kilt definition but why? The modern kilts are PV, Velcro’d, not tartans and made overseas by machines.

We’ve already bastardized what a kilt is. Be honest, you know this is true. Adopting an older word to encompass all male skirts to appease the fact the majority of the population sees skirts as womenswear is just a continuation of what’s already started to happen. Modernization. Why stop the kilt definition changes where it is now?

We have to stop fooling ourselves that the true definition of a kilt remains what it did from the Middle Ages or whenever they were invented.
Post Reply