Quote Originally Posted by Gradatim Vincemus View Post
I refuse to acknowledge in any way that it is a skirt because it is a Kilt, just because it does not have a crotch does not make it a skirt. (BTW the idea that manhood must be predicated on having a cloth outer-garment at the crotch is biologically daft). There are things called Kilt-skirts designed for ladies but they are not proper kilts. Equally my sense of manhood is enhanced not diminished by wearing my kilt. However, as a corollary to that I have a more assertive demenour in the kilt to someone being obnoxious about it. Thus I feel emboldened in my kilt so that Nemo Me Impune Lacessit (Who dare mess wi' me) informs my attitude
Interesting points. I guess that draws us back from the question of the OP to the question of what is it about the kilt that differentiates it from a skirt. I think coming up with a physical difference that applies to traditional kilts, historical kilts, sport kilts, utilikilts, etc. and not some skirts would be difficult. If there is no physical difference, then a kilt worn by a woman would be a skirt, and a lace-lined skirt worn by a man would be a kilt. (Now I'm just playing the devil's advocate! )