What is the future of the Kilt?

[RockyR]

I'm not trying to be too sarcastic here, but why dont we just get rid of the tagline on this website "a kilted community" and join the rest of the MUG websites out there?

b/c it's NOT a "Men in skirts" comminuty. This is a message board for kilts. While the definition of a kilt may be a little looser than some traditionalists would like it to be, there is a line, even if it is a LITTLE blurry.

Here's the faq's policy on it:

http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...q_new_faq_item

There ARE other websites out there that ARE for Men In Skirts. While that's fine for them, it's not what draws people to XMARKS.

[Erisianmonkey]

We seem to be beating our heads against the definition wall again. If the maker calls it a kilt, it is most likely a kilt (within reason, i.e., it has pleats and aprons, etc.). This goes for just about everything from the modern UK style kilts to tanks. I've said it before, and I'll say it again-one of the biggest problems the kilt faces in becoming more mainstream is the kilt police. The reason this is so is that someone overhearing a kiltie talking about someone's kilt saying, "That's not a kilt because of X," then feels qualified to go spout off to some innocent kiltie that they know what a kilt is and that the kiltie isn't wearing what they know to be a kilt so the kiltie is wearing a skirt. A little solidarity is called for here people. There are tanks that I wouldn't wear except maybe at gunpoint that others here would love to have. (Loud McLeod springs immediately to mind) There are contemporary kilt styles that I really don't like and won't wear. (UK's, the X-kilt, any kilt with big cargo pockets on it.) But those are my preferences on what I wear on my body, and they don't-- and shouldn't-- pertain to anyone else. I wouldn't tell someone wearing any of those garments that they aren't wearing a kilt. (I will admit that I did throw one barb at the Tripp kilt though- I called it Clan MacDayGlo. 'cause that kilt is almost as loud as the McLeod!)

[Chef]

If the maker calls it a kilt, it is most likely a kilt (within reason, i.e., it has pleats and aprons, etc.).

The "within reason" is where the discussion lies. We all have differing ideas of where that line lies. As far as whether it is a kilt because the maker calls it one, I think that doesn't fly. I am sure many would use a different term for their garments if they thought it would be good for marketing, but right now the term kilt is better for marketing, whether the garment is or is not a kilt.

One thing I note, when some members feel that the "kilt" police don't consider one style or another to be a kilt they get quite upset. I honestly don't understand this. In most cases I haven't seen opinions that say you shouldn't be allowed to wear it, that I would understand, but it seems to get people upset if their garment isn't considered to be a kilt by some others.

I admit I don't consider all the garments I see on these boards to be kilts, but I will vigorously defend anyones right to wear them. I don't mean to offend anyone with the question but I am curious as it is a theme I have seen repeated often on these boards.

[Dreadbelly]

I have something to say here, but lack the right words. I had typed out a rather large post, and just deleted it. The lines just become to blurry past a certain point in defining a kilt and a kilted website, and I honestly do not want to trample on anybody's toes for once. Nor do I wish to raise any eyebrows. (Well, maybe just a little) I do have something to say however... And wish I had the right words to say it.

I don't know where the line is drawn for a "kilt" here. I know that threads about sarongs and macabi skirts tend to be locked down or deleted rather quickly. Those are obviously over the line. The mods are right in canning those. Yet threads about borderline kilts, like the ever so popular Tripp kilt, if that is not a kilt, then why do those threads even exist? Had it fallen outside the borders of what a kilt is, and I am NOT going to say which side of the border it lands on, but if it did somehow fall outside, wouldn't or shouldn't the mods delete those threads in keeping with the rules and the mission statement of this site?

Because those threads exist, and because I know that our mods are not boneheads, I feel my self leaning in the direction that these borderline kilts, like the Tripp kilt, are indeed kilts.

Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Right?

I still wish I could say what was actually on my mind. But I can't think of the right way to say it with out it coming out wrong or sounding, well, bad. And I don't want to introduce Mr Pointy Stick to Mr Hornet's Nest.

[Erisianmonkey]

I will clarify my personal definition of a kilt, then I am getting out of this thread before the fireworks start. To me, a kilt is a knee-length unbifurcated garment designed for a man, consisting of aprons at the front which overlap from left to right and pleats in the rear.

Further, deponent sayeth not.

[Dreadbelly]

I will clarify my personal definition of a kilt, then I am getting out of this thread before the fireworks start. To me, a kilt is a knee-length unbifurcated garment designed for a man, consisting of aprons at the front which overlap from left to right and pleats in the rear.

Further, deponent sayeth not.

Men, monkeys, and occasionally Wacko Warner, no?

[Erisianmonkey]

Men, monkeys, and occasionally Wacko Warner, no?

Don't know what to say the monkeys won't do!

I guess I should have said designed for a male.

[Dreadbelly]

That Monday morning when the milk was spilt
There was this monkey in a tartan kilt
He lifted his pleats and what did I see
One little tail wiggling with glee
Don't know what to say the monkeys wont do
(I didn't know your ribbon was blue)
Don't know what to say the monkeys wont do

Edit.

Hello Nurse!

[Raphael]

If we are to debate the definition of kilt every 2 months, there will be no future for the kilt. Just wear what ever that strikes your fancy.

[Chef]

I don't know where the line is drawn for a "kilt" here. I know that threads about sarongs and macabi skirts tend to be locked down or deleted rather quickly. Those are obviously over the line. The mods are right in canning those. Yet threads about borderline kilts, like the ever so popular Tripp kilt, if that is not a kilt, then why do those threads even exist? Had it fallen outside the borders of what a kilt is, and I am NOT going to say which side of the border it lands on, but if it did somehow fall outside, wouldn't or shouldn't the mods delete those threads in keeping with the rules and the mission statement of this site?

Because those threads exist, and because I know that our mods are not boneheads, I feel my self leaning in the direction that these borderline kilts,like the Tripp kilt, are indeed kilts.

Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Right?

Exactly. I don't necessarily buy into the idea that they are kilts because the thread doesn't get deleted, but they are not universally thought of as "not" kilts.

In all honesty this is not the direction I was hoping the thread would go. I since I started the thread maybe I did so poorly.

My idea for the thread was to have a discussion on what was the future of the kilt. Does it have a future as a mainstream garment or will it always be outside the mainstream, either as an historical/ Scottish outfit or as a rebel type of garment. I added my thoughts as to what I thought could help the kilt as a mainstream garment in MY opinion.

Maybe we can try to get the discussion on that track, otherwise I do see the thread going south on the discussion of what is or isn't a kilt.