I chose to wear trousers today

[Charlie]

Our folk dance club organises a walk over the hills every month. Today was the day and the weather was windy and cold. Normally I'd wear a denim kilt, but today chose to wear trousers. I had 60 denier tights underneath and the wind still got through. It's the first time most members of the club have seen me in trousers, and I had the "Where's the kilt?" question. Nice to tell them that I chose to wear trousers

Charlie

[sapphire]

Does the fact that you chose to wear trousers mean that you were dressing like a woman? {referring to you sig line and teasing you}

[Charlie]

Does the fact that you chose to wear trousers mean that you were dressing like a woman? {referring to you sig line and teasing you}

Tease accepted No, I didn't wear jeans. In fact I wore trousers I'd normally wear to work because I don't have any jeans or scruffy trousers (just don't wear them outside work). They are in the wash now, because the bottoms got covered in mud - something that doesn't happen with a kilt. Only the socks get muddy - far easier to clean

On the other hand, the women in the party were also wearing trousers - perhaps I was dressed like a woman .... so were the other men in the party

Charlie

[cessna152towser]

Well I chose to wear trousers today for the first time since September. First day of the new season as a volunteer at an aviation museum where the new uniform which has been introduced includes black trousers. The secretary suggested I could wear a black kilt instead but I believed that the trousers better fitted the corporate image. Thats what this should be all about - men's right to choose between trousers or kilts/skirts rather than an expectation that kilts/skirts need to be worn every day. I was favourably surprised that no one asked wheres the kilt today, just as no one asks why the kilt or why the denim skirt, which is just the way it should be, after all nobody would ask a lady why she has chosen trousers or a skirt.

[Pythos]

Cessna, you volunteered, yet there is a "uniform". What kinda goofy junk is that? Corporate image? That is just insulting to an ex museum docent.

To volunteer means you are offering YOUR services for free. A uniform is something that volunteers do not wear. They should look presentable, but no damned uniforms, unless they are examples of old military uniforms, or better yet flyer's outfits considering you are helping at an aviation based museum.

The word museum and corporate being linked just sends shivers down my spine.

Understand there was no insult intended in this response to your post. I understand your not wearing a skirt. But saying the trousers fit more with the corporate image than the kilt is kinda sad to read.

Corporate image is something people should want to run away at full speed from. Most of these are the source of the dulling and dumbing down of our cultures.

[sapphire]

I have to disagree. To be successful, museums and charitable corporations have to have a business model and have to operate in a "corporate" manner.

For example charitable 501c3 corporations do not pay taxes, but have to submit a tax return to the IRS. Corporations whos income is below a certain threshold do not get audited, but those above that level do get audited.

In addition, their financial statements are analyzed by Chartiy Navigator comparing overhead and administrative costs to the costs spent directly towards the mission of the corporation.

As to uniforms, in the field of animal welfare there are events where a uniform is worn by the volunteers. For example, I recently attended a "Town Meeting" in which the participants shared their experiences with the no-kill equation. Employees and volunteers from the Boston Animal Rescue League wore bright red vests with the logo and name of the Bostosn Animal Rescue League.

If I get deployed to an emergency scene, I wear either a Central Massacusetts DIsaster Animal Response Team t-shirt or a United Animal Nations t-shirt. Once I get through their training, I could got out wearing a Humane Society of the United States t-shirt. The one I wear will depend upon the group I deploy with. In all cases I'd deploy as a volunteer. The purpose of the uniform is so that we are easily recognized and the function leaders can easily identify the groups that are working under their direction.

Those people from the community who volunteer to help people in emergencies were obnoxiously bright vests with the letters CERT, Community Emergency Response Team

[crfriend]

There's something interesting in this thread, and it's interesting not for what's been said, but rather what has not been said.

Charlie and Cessna have both made the conscious decision to eschew skirts for a time and to wear trousers. This implies that they took responsibility for that choice and exercised their freedom to do so. To both of them, I say, "Bravo! Well done!"

Certainly a world in which we have a choice of what to wear beats one where no such choice exists.

[Pythos]

Understand, my post concerning Cessna's choice was not one about him not being able to wear the kilt. It was the reason given.

Corporate image.

Saphire, I am actually shocked to here you of all people back the corporate image idea. T shirts or vests are not really uniforms but more identifiers of someones service. When I here uniforms I think of items of clothing you are mandated by some higher authority to wear. These items include all clothing, pants, skirts, shirts, colors, belts, shoe styles, and so on. No room whatsoever for creativity, or more importantly individuality.

I like what you stated Saphire. Also please don't get me wrong Cessna, I am not saying you must wear the kilt. It was just the reason you stated for not wearing it. That's all.

I worked at a museum one summer. It was an aviation museum (still in existence). The only "uniform" we had was either a hat with the museum logo, or a vest with a name tag on it (we mostly wore both). There was no limitation on what shirt, pants, or what have you, you wore. The only requirement was that it was "decent"

[sapphire]

Pythos, I think you and I may be getting tangled up in our words.

All of the rescue/sheltering agencies I mentioned are tax exempt corporations, but corporations none the less. We are expected to behave in a professional manner that reflects positively on the mission of the corporation.

Can you describe what you feel is "corporate image"? This isn't a challenge, I'm just curious about what you mean by the term.

Actually, as a respondent with the agencies I mentioned, I AM required to wear a uniform if I am at the site of an emergency. I have to wear the t-shirt of that agency, a badge issued by that agency, black pants (no jeans, shorts or skirts), sturdy black shoes or boots. If the weather is cold we can wear sweatshirts, but only in a particular color ie red for United Animal Nations. It is highly suggested, but not required, that we wear tactical pants.

On the other hand, when we respond to small emergencies we wear whatever we feel is appropriate for the situation. Small emergencies include trapping, foster care, and so on. and I wear what I want.

So in my particular case a uniform is required in some cases and appropriate attire is required in others. Two examples: when I testify at the state house, I wear business clothers. The shelter that I'm associated with will be having a formal fund raising party. I'll wear a gown and if Carl chooses to come I'll be proud to have him at my side whether he chooses a trousered look or a skirted look (I'd prefer the skirted look actually)

If the Animal Control Officer from a nearby town comes, I expect that she will come in uniform, not because she has to but out of pride for what she does.

[cessna152towser]

Our museum's major sponsor, who also owns the airport and makes the land and buildings available for our museum is a major freight transport company operating in road and rail haulage, shipping containers, and air freight. They supply uniforms to their staff who are all smartly dressed, the men with navy blue shirts and ties, with black trousers, even the lorry drivers are expected to wear a collar and tie. My uniform also includes a NATO crew pullover, in recognition of my involvement with the aviation side. Without this sponsor there would be no museum, hence my willingness to comply with corporate image.

[Pythos]

When I hear "corporate image" images of men and women in bland suits with suitcases come to mind.

Bland. Borring. Or Institutionalized. No individuality, no creativity. Think inside the box. Stagnant. Drones.

These are words that come to my mind when I think corporate image.

Cessna, I understand your situation and the museums. Sounds like you got a regular monopoly running things there. That is unfortunate. But these days a necessary evil.

So is their advertising every where too?

Some damnable corporation has taken the German U boat that was at Birkendale (spelling), museum, and instead of displaying it in one piece has decided to cut the thing into sections for display. That is another thing about corporations they are like people in a large group. They seem to lack any kind of common sense.

"I have an idea, let's take one of two of this type of submarine in the world and cut it up into pieces so no one can get a scale of the thing."

At least the Chicago museum of science kept U-505 in one piece and put it in a decent display.

I have noticed though that England seems to do that with alot of display items. I think the only part of the Vickers Valiant is one or two nose sections. The same becoming true for the Handley Page Victors, and even the Avro Vulcans. They love to keep the noses, and throw the rest of the machine away. Why do they do that? (I know it is off topic, but seeing as you are in the Museum business you might know)

[Departed Member]

I have noticed though that England seems to do that with alot of display items. I think the only part of the Vickers Valiant is one or two nose sections. The same becoming true for the Handley Page Victors, and even the Avro Vulcans. They love to keep the noses, and throw the rest of the machine away. Why do they do that? (I know it is off topic, but seeing as you are in the Museum business you might know)

We still have one complete Valiant (XD 818) at Cosford Air Museum and three privately owned nose sections. The Victors fared a little better (having lasted longer!) with 5 intact in the UK (and one in Canada?) and no less than 8 nose ends? The key factor is, sadly, space! The intact K1 at Cosford was dismantled (to a nose) when a K2 (think Gulf War) became available. There's just not enough room for the larger aircraft in particular. We'll be (very) lucky to retain even one of the beautiful VC.10s intact when they finish in the not too far distant future.

As for the Vulcan, there are, I believe, still 15 preserved intact here and 3 abroad. Again, the only intact B1 was destroyed and replaced by a B2. This year saw a return to the air of XH558, but this is currently 'grounded' due to lack of on-going financial sponsorship. For all of these, the added difficulty (lack!) of undercover storage and maintenance required, even just to 'stand still' has caused the demise of too many airframes. Also, we don't choose to reduce render perfectly good aircraft to cockpit sections, but your dear Mr Clinton forced just that scenario on us in respect of many would-be second hand Phantom & Buccaneer owners!

[Pythos]

That is truly sad. In the states the only reason there is a nose section on display is because the airframe was so far gone.

But this is in fact WAY of topic (thought definitely on one of my passions, aircraft and subsJ)

I do appologize from swinging the wheel off course:)

Thanks for the info Merlin. Good to hear the glorious Vulcan and some Victors have not met the same fate as the Valiant. Also thank goodnes this fate was quickly swept away for the TSR2.

Oh, I also was not aware that the one complete valiant escaped the cutting blade. I read somewhere that that is what was gonna happen to it. At least one complete example of each ofthe V force should exist.

[cessna152towser]

I should also perhaps add that some days my duties at the aviation museum also include guided tours of Vulcan XJ823, for which a kilt/skirt would be impracticable due to the need to climb the access and internal ladders.

[Pythos]

Now that reason works. Makes total and complete sense.

And wow is that one gorgeous bird.