The right skirt is the superior cold weather garment.

[Wesley]

I have discovered another great advantage that skirts have over pants. I recently made a comparison between bifurcated and unbifercated garments in the cold. I’ve done plenty of cold weather hiking wearing layers of long johns, wool pants, insulated shells or whatever. But this week with the temperatures around 5° F (-15 ° C) I wore a skirt on a couple of my walks (1 hour+). The skirt I wore was long (almost to the ankle) made of heavy pleated wool and lined. I wore tights and heavy wool socks to my knees. I also tried a couple slips underneath for extra warmth.

Overall I was quite warm and very comfortable. Much more so than usual for the weight of the lower body garments I had to wear for the weather. The major difference between my usual wear and a skirt was the uniformity of warmth of my legs under the skirt and the comfort and freedom of movement. The front of my thighs did not get their usual cold spots that I feel when walking in pants in the cold (at least not to the same degree). It is vastly more comfortable to walk in the skirt than it is having thick layers chafing between my thighs. I did not experience and heat loss for being almost bare legged and exposed, obviously (as I’ve noticed in less severe weather) because the skirt and retains traps warm air under it. ). I found too that I warmed up nicely when I was stationary, standing or seated.

I don’t think a skirt would work well with snow shoes or in more rugged terrain, but I might try that out too sometime. If I felt I could, I would adopt a heavy wool skirt as my standard outfit for cold weather activity - just for the simple advantages I found over bifurcated cold weather gear. I’ll at least keep skirting on my daily walks – not in spite of but especially in the sever weather..

[crfriend]

I have discovered another great advantage that skirts have over pants. I recently made a comparison between bifurcated and unbifercated garments in the cold. I’ve done plenty of cold weather hiking wearing layers of long johns, wool pants, insulated shells or whatever. But this week with the temperatures around 5° F (-15 ° C) I wore a skirt on a couple of my walks (1 hour+). The skirt I wore was long (almost to the ankle) made of heavy pleated wool and lined. I wore tights and heavy wool socks to my knees. I also tried a couple slips underneath for extra warmth.

I can second the observation here. I routinely go out in the cold, sometimes to do real work (e.g. shovelling the driveway and walks), and am usually skirted as I find it warmer (so long as I stay dry) than trousers.

One useful thing about skirts -- especially long full ones -- is that you can get quite creative with what goes under for warmth. Much more so than with trousers. This is because whatever you're doing does not need to pass between the legs, so three or four layers are trivially simple and comfortable.

When it's stupidly cold here, I tend to layer up with slips (for friction control; the ones I have are useless for warmth) and petticoats (for look and warmth) in addition to the skirt itself and whatever else there might be. If it looks like the deep-freeze we're in now is going to hold, I'm going to contemplate making a special winter-only petticoat out of quilted material sort of like this one which should be very warm in the winter-time. The only drawback would be that it would be stifling indoors and would probably have to be removed (try explaining that piled in the corner of your office).

[Brad]

I wore a short skirt with pantyhose once when it was 12 degrees F as an experiment. I found while standing, if I kept my legs together, I retained body heat from both legs instead of that heat going off into the air, and actually felt warmer than if I was in pants. Also with pants, the garment itself gets cold and transfers coldness to the wearer, while the nylons are tight fitting and retain heat. This got me thnking that a skirt could be warmer than pants. It's like mittens instead of gloves. Keeping the fingers together transfers the heat between them and you feel warmer. Of course mittens are off limits to guys for reasons we don't know....

[Kirbstone]

Speaking of mittens. They're certainly not off limits to guys. Try any ski-shop and you'll find stacks of mittens for guys there. There are even very clever ones which have fingertip free gloves for handling coins/keys &c but with a mitten hood that pulls over the lot when you want to charge down the piste or wherever. I now see they are making thin ones for rowers...a very useful development.

T.

[Wesley]

I wore a short skirt with pantyhose once when it was 12 degrees F as an experiment. I found while standing, if I kept my legs together, I retained body heat from both legs instead of that heat going off into the air, and actually felt warmer than if I was in pants. Also with pants, the garment itself gets cold and transfers coldness to the wearer, while the nylons are tight fitting and retain heat. This got me thnking that a skirt could be warmer than pants. It's like mittens instead of gloves. Keeping the fingers together transfers the heat between them and you feel warmer. Of course mittens are off limits to guys for reasons we don't know....

This is one of the reasons why I prefer a long skirt to a kilt. I do wish that calf length kilts were "canonical" in the kilt community - I would offer every excuse in the world to wear one all the time. The Kilt is too short to keep you warm in winter, and too woolen to be comfortable in summer. I suspect an English plot.

[Wesley]

I have discovered another great advantage that skirts have over pants. I recently made a comparison between bifurcated and unbifercated garments in the cold. I’ve done plenty of cold weather hiking wearing layers of long johns, wool pants, insulated shells or whatever. But this week with the temperatures around 5° F (-15 ° C) I wore a skirt on a couple of my walks (1 hour+). The skirt I wore was long (almost to the ankle) made of heavy pleated wool and lined. I wore tights and heavy wool socks to my knees. I also tried a couple slips underneath for extra warmth.

I can second the observation here. I routinely go out in the cold, sometimes to do real work (e.g. shovelling the driveway and walks), and am usually skirted as I find it warmer (so long as I stay dry) than trousers.

One useful thing about skirts -- especially long full ones -- is that you can get quite creative with what goes under for warmth. Much more so than with trousers. This is because whatever you're doing does not need to pass between the legs, so three or four layers are trivially simple and comfortable.

True, true. I routinely wear tights under my hiking skirts. My thighs are too fat to tolerate the chafing abrasion I experience wearing an un-bifurcated garment, and the winter is too long and too cold to leave my legs unprotected from the sudden updraft that might assail them in the Northern woods. I did not think of wearing a peticoat under my winter wool but that would certainly add more insulative dead air and isolate the leading edge of my thighs from contact with the cold surface of the wool skirt better than a lining and a couple of flimsy slips.

BTW. It's a best kept secret that among certain religous groups the women not only are required, but actually prefer to wear full long skirts (and who-knows-what goes under them) in the colder seasons.

[crfriend]

I did not think of wearing a peticoat under my winter wool but that would certainly add more insulative dead air and isolate the leading edge of my thighs from contact with the cold surface of the wool skirt better than a lining and a couple of flimsy slips.

Indeed, and depending on how full the main (outer) skirt is you may be able to layer a couple of them for when it's really cold. I was quite intrigued when I saw the quilted petticoats in various museum collections and am seriously considering fabricating one if it stays cold much longer. Just one of those would provide vastly more insulation than long-johns and any combination of trousers put together. (Save for the fact that I'd have to ditch it for when I was indoors, it'd be perfect.)

BTW. It's a best kept secret that among certain religous groups the women not only are required, but actually prefer to wear full long skirts (and who-knows-what goes under them) in the colder seasons.

I'm not a big one on the making of things "required" as that subverts free will, but from first-hand experience I can say that long skirts and appropriate accoutrements underneath are quite a bit warmer than trousers. (Of course this flies in the face of the "requirement" that men wear trousers in the modern western world.) I'd be willing to bet that those women "so required" wear petticoats (at least) underneath both for control reasons and warmth in winter (and lighter "control bits" for summer; long full skirts are close to unmanageable without something to add volume to keep the hem out of the way of the feet).

[JRMILLER]

This is one of the reasons why I prefer a long skirt to a kilt. I do wish that calf length kilts were "canonical" in the kilt community - I would offer every excuse in the world to wear one all the time. The Kilt is too short to keep you warm in winter, and too woolen to be comfortable in summer. I suspect an English plot.

I made a floor length kilt which I wear around here on a regular basis. What people see is plaid, pleated and worn by a guy, hence, it must be a kilt. The average person on the street doesn't have enough depth of knowledge to be able to discern proper details like length, location and form of pleats, buckles or nay, etc. I have also worn a long cord skirt that I made, it has no pleats, just a full, floor length brown cord skirt and when people talk to me about it, they always assume it's some kind of kilt.

Bottom line, we study this stuff and know all the proper details, must people don't have a clue. Don't sweat the details, most people won't know the difference.

[Wesley]

I did not think of wearing a peticoat under my winter wool but that would certainly add more insulative dead air and isolate the leading edge of my thighs from contact with the cold surface of the wool skirt better than a lining and a couple of flimsy slips.

Indeed, and depending on how full the main (outer) skirt is you may be able to layer a couple of them for when it's really cold. I was quite intrigued when I saw the quilted petticoats in various museum collections and am seriously considering fabricating one if it stays cold much longer. Just one of those would provide vastly more insulation than long-johns and any combination of trousers put together. (Save for the fact that I'd have to ditch it for when I was indoors, it'd be perfect.)

I tried a petticoat the other day. It was slightly below the knees and quite full. It was a bit warmer than last week so it was hard to make a comparison. The petticoat kept me warm, but by making the skirt puff out more at the hem line it allowed more cold air to infiltrate my legs as I walked. It was really comfortable when I sat down to have that extra insulation. At the nbext cold snap I'll try a longer petticoat (if I can find one before then).

BTW. It's a best kept secret that among certain religous groups the women not only are required, but actually prefer to wear full long skirts (and who-knows-what goes under them) in the colder seasons.

I'm not a big one on the making of things "required" as that subverts free will, but from first-hand experience I can say that long skirts and appropriate accoutrements underneath are quite a bit warmer than trousers. (Of course this flies in the face of the "requirement" that men wear trousers in the modern western world.) I'd be willing to bet that those women "so required" wear petticoats (at least) underneath both for control reasons and warmth in winter (and lighter "control bits" for summer; long full skirts are close to unmanageable without something to add volume to keep the hem out of the way of the feet).

Plain Mennonites and Amish do not employ petticoats. I suspect that's because they would be considered "fancy" and really intended to make a woman look fuller hipped and more attractive. A petticoat would be "fancy". They'll wear "snuggies" or pants under their dresses if they need some extra insullation.

[crfriend]

I tried a petticoat the other day. It was slightly below the knees and quite full. It was a bit warmer than last week so it was hard to make a comparison. The petticoat kept me warm, but by making the skirt puff out more at the hem line it allowed more cold air to infiltrate my legs as I walked. It was really comfortable when I sat down to have that extra insulation. At the nbext cold snap I'll try a longer petticoat (if I can find one before then).

You'll probably want one that's just a little bit shorter than the skirt in question, and preferably one with an extra ruffle around the hem as that will tend to trap more warm air and keep more of the cold out. This is the petticoat I use when it's cold out, and the skirt to go with it. (The petticoat is also useful when it's warmer when worn with lighter skirts.)

Plain Mennonites and Amish do not employ petticoats. I suspect that's because they would be considered "fancy" and really intended to make a woman look fuller hipped and more attractive. A petticoat would be "fancy". They'll wear "snuggies" or pants under their dresses if they need some extra insullation.

I did not know that; I've always tended to think of plain petticoats as purely functional garb. Live and learn.