Regimental style and hygiene

[longshadows]

Well, one could make the case that seeing underware under someones manly kilt is is horror unto itself. Unless it's the briefest of black briefs.

Think about it, when we walk, we generally keep our legs fairly close together. If one were to look up they might catch a bit of bum, but nothing more. Otherwise, they would catch someone's Mikey Mouse boxers or white Y-fronts and that would indeed be noticable and quite distracting from the whole kilt mystique! N'est-ce pas?

:rotfl:

[Ray]

I don't have problem with what you are suggesting. I am always commando with my trad kilt, and it has done me well for 11 years.

One dry cleaning, and that's it. I agree with the "less sweat" argument; it's quite true.

Ultimately, it is up to the individual. I will continue to wear my kilts in the trad style, but respect anyone else who might wish to deviate from this approach.

Ray

[Departed Member]

I'm intrigued, where did this idea that going 'regimental', 'commando' or whatever, was 'traditionally' Scottish? Up until a few years ago, I'd only heard of it being a military tradition, complete with long-handled mirror parade ground inspections! Certainly, Kilt-related conversations in different parts of Scotland (North of the Forth valley), way back in the '70s & '80s, seemed to indicate that the knickers worn by the (school) lads were identical, to all intents and purposes to those of the girls. Similar style garments were worn by most adults, too. Only the older folk (invariably ex-mil or national service) carried on their military 'tradition'.

South of the Forth? I.e, the 'sassenachs'! Conversations usually ran along the lines of "If you want to wear a Kilt, fine! Just don't ever suggest that we do!" Certainly, that viewpoint was re-inforced by some of my former work colleagues who hailed from places such as Hawick, Dumfries, Beattock & Mossend as recently as five years ago. None of them referred to it as wearing 'THE' Kilt, either, but the more grammatically correct 'A' Kilt.

As for wearing a 'slip' (or whatever your personal description would be) under your Kilt, then why not? It's not as if a Kilt is a cheap item to either buy or clean. It's all a matter of choice - your choice. If you go out somewhere, wearing knickers, & it turns repressively hot (say, over 50F), then it's not usually a problem to discreetly remove said items, is it?

[Big and Bashful]

Merlin,
don't know what those wierd East coasters do, but here on the Wet Coast, sorry West coast, I was warned before attending a wedding that once the women had had a few drinkies they tend to 'test' for men wearing undercrackers of any sort and woebetides any found wearing any! This turned out to be true.
Maybe it's just a west coast thing but most of the people round here seem to think that underwear under there is for wimps.
Anyway who cares? wear whatever you want whenever you want, it's personal preference at the end of the day!

[Departed Member]

Yeah! My 'take' on this (women's concerns as to the 'contents' of yer Kilt) is to say "You can touch, but you CANNOT look!":naughty:

[Since1982]

Concerning the wearing of any kind of underpants by Scottish Highlanders. I'm about 1/6th Scottish of the Fraser clan and the way it came to me, through some research into Highland life in the pre-18th century was that mostly poor Scottish Highlanders never thought of, didn't have, or never heard of anyone wearing ANYTHING under the great kilt. The "Little Kilt" or the kilt most commonly worn today is probably shorter, by a few inches(I don't think Highlanders off to a clan war in the early 1700's got down on the floor on their knees to see if their kilt hem barely touched the floor) as the new Scots say is supposed to be the traditional length. I also don't think those same Scots cared too much about personal hygiene beyond a daily dip in the nearest Loch...This is probably where the origin of "regimental" or "commando" came from in regard to kilts. I looked this up in a book at the local library called "The Great Clans of Scotland". It is a very old book first copywrited in 1948 and most recently in 1961, so I guess it's out of print now except for the copies in libraries. It's a very informative book, giving lots of history of the clan wars and the various customs of the various clansmen and clans, it also lists all the tartans of scotland including my own, the Fraser tartan. If I ever lose enough weight to wear a kilt and feel good in it, I'll probably buy a couple of them in both the historical and hunting patterns.

[Departed Member]

Skip, I don't think anyone wore underwear, as such, until around the late 18th/early 19th century. In any case, the 'little' Kilt wasn't 'invented' (or 'evolved', if you prefer) until the mid-1700s (or even later?). Underwear certainly became 'de rigeur' during the 19th Century with, of course, the notable exception of the Highland Regiments. Until relatively recently, this has been the 'norm', former soldiers continuing 'their' tradition. It is probably the modern need to appear 'macho', that has sparked the reversal of the underwear trend.

I'm curious to know the Irish 'take' on this subject. I've only ever seen Kilts worn there on a strictly formal basis, unlike Cornwall many years ago, where I first saw someone wearing a 'plain' black Kilt (NO sporran, by the way). As for Wales, the latest country to advance into Kilthood, I've never seen a Kilt, other than on a follower of Scottish Football (or Rugby) teams, so as it's less than one generation old, it'll (whatever/whichever) thus require another two to become a 'tradition'!

[kiltlovinglass]

I'm with Merlin on this one. No one wore underwear back then because it didn't exist. And if it did, it would be in the form of huuuuuge bloomers, which, I assume, would totally throw of the silhouette of a kilt. However, I'm an advocate for the most part of underwear in special circumstances...whoever said it earlier, the open staircases and places/outings there is a possibility of being 'exposed'.

Accidentally flashing someone in the 17th and 18th centuries would be slightly different than accidentally flashing someone now. Namely, you'd go lawsuit free in the 17th.

[Departed Member]

Bloomers!!!! Now don't go giving some of the folk here, ideas like that, young KLL!!! My sis-in-law (mind you, she is half Welsh!) once suggested that if I did feel the cold, whilst wearing one of my Kilts, that they might be a good idea(?). I just pointed out that it would have to be a veeerycold day, indeed! Quite frankly, Kilts can become almost too hot to wear if the thermometer hits, say 45-50F - after that, it's time to 'abandon underwear'. Searing temperatures in the 60F range call for either 'thinner material' Kilts, or as a lot of blokes are finding, Skirts!

[Ingy]

Hi Folks!

Sorry, don't have too many problems (like ones above ~pray~ )... at least not yet ..... So all I can say is....


Kilt/Skirt = 'Regimental'

Otherwise, what's the bloody point?..... I like it all hang free, as it were!!!

[Sylvain]

In fact, they did wear undies. The normal underwear was a shirt, which was longer than what we now call shirt. It went down to the thigh, and men wearing trousers put it into them.

[Since1982]

you mean like a modern Basketball player? They have shirts that go all the way down to their knees and mostly cover the "shorts" they wear that mostly go all the way down to their mid calves. Most shirts I have today if I don't tuck them in hang down to at least my upper thighs, I think most shirts have for quite a long time. Every movie I've ever seen with guys putting on suits, the shirt hung down to at least the bottom of the bum or the upper thighs, but I wouldnt call those "underwear" ...what a lot of wealthier manly men did in the 1700's and 1800's was wear a "nightshirt" under their clothes and the top half acted like an undershirt and the bottom half was inside their trousers or whatever they were wearing. When they checked in to an INN for the night, all they had to do was drop their pants/kilts and they were ready for bed. I don't think most poor people had the extra money to lay out for a "nightshirt" but had to go commando for fiscal reasons.

[Sylvain]

I don't know how baseball players dress, but it seems this is the way. ASAIK, everyone used to wear a shirt, both men and women (but latter's was longer). Poor people's shirts were simply made of coarser linen.
This was the only garments that could be easily washed.
Bifurcated undies are something quite new.
Shirts were undies; outer garments were jackets (and the great kilt can be seen as a jacket), dresses, and leggings, as men's jackets got shorter.

[Hamish]

Well, all I can say is that I must be blessed to have reached my 70th year and not be troubled with any of the unpleasant "leakages", etc., that seem to afflict many of my younger brethren. The rudiments of personal hygeine were instilled into me at an early age and remain with me still, enabling me to wear my kilts 'regimentally' with the greatest confidence.

Also, when one has been wearing the kilt as long as I have, 'exposure' does not come into the equation. Kilt Management should be a compulsory requirement of the newcomer's Kilt Driving Test!!

[Tripp49]

Words spoken from a true kilt wearer.My friend Ham.It is a shame that it cost so much to travel,if you ever met Ham,you would know just what a warm and wonderful person he is.
Ham I sure wish I could afford to visit across the pond.But you are always near to Miss.Vicky and my heart.
Thinking of you often.
Buddy

Tripp49