skirtcafe.org

Yesterday I received my first 'modern idiom' kilt from Union Kilts, a pale blue denim one. Beautifully made, and will last for years. But they didn't send me the plain one I ordered. Instead it has a bright embroidered design on the front, and is a kilt which they sell at three times the cost of the plain one. I should be pleased.
I knew it would be strange adopting a 'utility' style after my usual kilts. But the embroidered front I don't know if I can live with.
The other thing I've noticed is that this kilt was the last one in the shop. Maybe they just wanted to get rid of it. Or it could just be a genuine packing mistake. I'll try to wear it, as it's so well made, and worth a lot more than I paid for it, but if anyone from Union Kilts is reading this, perhaps they could provide an explanation. Or maybe they want it back.
The big question is, will I look, as a 60 year old, like an old hippy?

I bought one as well, but not with the embroidered front thank God, I don't really like mine as it is too stiff, I'm not too sure but they were selling them off cheap discontinued line as they say, so you get what to pay for, I have washed it once to see if it would soften but I didn't, but there again jeans are the same when brand new so maybe another wash or two may do the trick.

It's a pity I didn't get what I paid for. Anyway, I've emailed them about it.

mugman wrote:Yesterday I received my first 'modern idiom' kilt from Union Kilts, a pale blue denim one. Beautifully made, and will last for years. [...] I knew it would be strange adopting a 'utility' style after my usual kilts. But the embroidered front I don't know if I can live with.[...]

I find this an interesting development. I can understand being ticked off at not receiving precisely what one ordered (that's a gaffe on the part of the merchant) but I find the level of "shock and horror" at the embroidery interesting. What we have here is a kilt. It's unmistakable as that form of highly specialised skirt -- it's left-over-right, it fastens with buckles, it has a flat apron, and its pleats are in the rear. The only thing that sets it apart is the embroidery, and this seems to push the male psyche into some form of overload.

Why should this be the case? Is the embroidered pattern unattractive? I submit not, but that's my opinion. Is it that the pattern is reminiscent of a floral motif and therefore "girly"? What if it was an embroidered logo for, say, "Caterpillar" (just to pick something "macho")? Would it be too much then? How about a vividly rendered Chinese dragon? Could it be the mere presence of the extra ornamentation that's disturbing? Is it that men aren't supposed to adorn themselves with "extras" that serve no functional purpose? What then, about rings and other jewellery? Neckties? Neckties serve absolutely no function, and until very recently were virtually required menswear!

Why do we (as men) seem to recoil from visual adornment? I don't "get it", although I find that I sometimes do the same thing -- "Wow! That's pretty, but I'd never have the guts to wear it."

I'm surprised to see such a symbol on a kilt. The embroidery is th "aum" - a Hindu symbol: http://www.religionfacts.com/hinduism/symbols/aum.htm
Is it there because it was made for religious use? for export? or just as a pattern?

I'm not sure I would be all that comfortable with an embroidered cross on apron of my kilt, although I suppose we do you all kinds of symbolism on kilt pins...


Miket

So that's what it is. I suppose it might appeal to some, but seems to be narrowing the marketing potential a bit.

Maybe it was a custon job sent to you by mistake?

Just had an apologetic message from Union Kilts, so everything is getting sorted, and a plain kilt will be with me as soon as this one is returned, with postage involved reimbursed.
I don't think there's anything deeply mysterious about dainty adornments not being immediately attractive to males. I guess it's just an ingrained response that we feel is appropriate. Like most human beings, I admire pretty things like beautiful flowers, etc, but wouldn't necessarily want to wear a daisy in my hair.
A kilt to me is purely a functional bit of kit, and sprinkling a sparkly design on the front seems to cancel out the ruggedness of this particular design.
Just my opinion.
Anyway, it's going back, which is a relief, as I know I'd never wear this publicly as confidently as I do normal kilts. Getting used to wearing pale blue denim is going to be enough of a challenge - so many people know me only for tartans.

Union Kilts will make it right. They appear to be a good company to work with.

I have one of their denim kilts. I have had it for about three months. I have it on now. Yes it is stiff but it has loosened up some after several washings and wearing it about. I don't expect it to loosen up very much being a heavy denim. I like the kilt as it is unusual being made out of denim rather than a tartan material. I don't think I would wear this one if it was 85 degrees F outside. I imagine in the summer this heavy denim would be too hot. It feels nice now that it is winter and the temperatures in the 30's (F).

I am looking for a lighter weight kilt for the summer. Trying to decide between USA Kilts or one of the day kilts from a Celtic shop in Cincinnati OH.

Happy kilting!

I like the kilt, and the embroidery. I can understand that men d'n't want any adornments, because they openly state "I am a colourful person, " here it is for the world to see, by way of the embroiedery. "I like " colourful clothes.

It attracts attention, which is something that people are not always asking for. Also with men, they may find that it is something womanly. - It is definately not ""Manly"", because men are scared of falling out of line with their "mates", putting up a front as if all men are rough and tough, and woman hunters. In short A lot of those real men are nothing but fakes, just to be able to mingle with other men without being "attacked" about their "unfaithfulness " to the club of men, even if they have a colourful taste, or have what is called "a femminine side" .

Men have to be sure of themselves, or strong in mind if they state openly that they are themselves, different than the conception of most men.

If you wear a skirt, and like adornments, then go for it. Be yourself.



Peter v

mugman wrote:Just had an apologetic message from Union Kilts, so everything is getting sorted, and a plain kilt will be with me as soon as this one is returned, with postage involved reimbursed.

One has to love a happy ending!

A kilt to me is purely a functional bit of kit, and sprinkling a sparkly design on the front seems to cancel out the ruggedness of this particular design.

That's fine, I was not casting aspersions on anyone's opinion with my comment. I just happen to like bright things, and the design on the kilt caught my eye (before I learned of the religious significance) as it broke up the blandness of the denim in grand style.

Getting used to wearing pale blue denim is going to be enough of a challenge - so many people know me only for tartans.

Everybody is used to you in kilts anyway; I suspect that the denim won't be all that big of a hurdle. Good luck with the replacement!

Embroidery is something I also do not wear as I tend to regard it as an adornment for garments intended for the ladies. I think once you receive the replacement kilt you will be very happy with it, and certainly will not look like an ageing hippy. I am 56 and wear both of my denim Union Kilts (light blue and navy blue) a lot, and they are definitely perceived as a macho garment.

I like my dark blue Denim UnionKilt. It's still fairly new and a bit stiff. It's my first kilt, but you have to start somewhere. I've worn it a few times in the last month. There's a future ahead!

I don't think we're there yet
I got a kilt back very quickly without the embroidery, which looks fine, except for the size. I asked for a 34", and either I've put on 2" in the last few days, or this is definitely not a 34".
I'm measuring the top of the waist band across, with front and back flat together - it measures 16". Now, does that make it a 34" size? Or is it measured at the hip, in which case it looks like 17" across. But I take waist as being waist, and not hip, which is usually wider.
Question. Have I been sent the wrong size now?
The only way I can tell is if one or more of you who have a Union Kilt can provide a much appreciated favour and measure your top waist band edge. Does the size label match the measurement

Revision to this post: I just measured another of my 34" waist kilts and it's definitely 17" across when flat. I think that answers my question. I believe I've been sent a 32" kilt with a 34" label inside. It seems my luck with the supplier is dogged. If someone could still verify their own measurement findings as above request, I would appreciate this. Many thanks.
I think this 'Kilt Phobia' thread is rapidly turning into a 'Fear Of Kilt Ordering' thread

My own experience of Union Kilts sizing is that they are somewhat smaller than the label declares and not consistent.

I visited them to look at the kilts (I'm always a bit dubious buying clothes on line unless they are cheap enough for me not to care if they don't fit).

I tried two kilts in the same size (2" larger than I'd usually wear, my "regular" size was obviously too small) and one, the black denim, fitted pretty well and has become my most frequently worn kilt. The other (a beautiful chocolate brown corduroy kilt, now sadly discontinued) was too small, despite claiming to be the same size. The conversation I had with Richard Gunning revealed that the denim and cord kilts were being made by different people, which probably accounts for the differences but does not help if trying to buy at a distance.

I guess this is not too much help to you, given that Devon is a long drive from Chester but I really do think that their sizing consistency means that it pays to try their kilts for size before buying.

I will say that Richard was very helpful and I'm sure you will have no trouble changing your kilt for a larger size, it's just a pain to have to go through the process.

Have fun,


Ian.