TFCK "full length" kilt?

[kiltedsawyer]

This has crossed the line into cross-dressing. To each his own, but this is not kilting. IMHO

[demobud]

I am too old to pull off ssomething like that. That being said, I wouldn't slam someone for wearing it, but I also wouldn't call it a kilt.

[sputnik]

i would have done it in my "f-you" punk rock days. today. . . not so much.

[Erisianmonkey]

Hear Hear!
Well said. It really suprised me how many people voted the most extreme responce in this pole.

Me too. I put that response in as a joke, just because the default length for a poll is four responses.

[pipesndrumsnun]

Well, the guy looks like a school marm...not a good look for men.

[TheKiltedWonder]

It really suprised me how many people voted the most extreme response in this pole.

I don't see why it's so surprising. I took the most extreme response to mean that it is absolutely not a kilt. I might have different ideas about how to wear the kilt or what it means personally than other people on this forum. Others might say "Mark, your kilt is too long/short; your hose are too high/low" but we're all talking about a kilt. Germany has Männerröcke which are like the same thing as these full length "kilts", but they're labelled "Röcke" (skirts) instead of "kilts".
Far be it from me to discriminate against what people "can" and "can't" wear. But please don't call that a kilt.

[slohairt]

I don't like it personally, but I wouldn't denigrate someone for wearing it. As for it's practicality in winter? Perhaps in a winter with little snow! This Canadian couldn't imagine trudging through deep snow in that number!

[Galician]

Apart from the reaction to the cross-dressing look, I found it interesting that guys here assumed that it would limit freedom of movement. I've worn an ankle-length robe for years, similar to the cassock worn by Ozman, and won't disagree....to a point. I wouldn't run a marathon in one, but it's not a straight-jacket.

My personal preference would be a full tunic to this style of kilt/skirt, but I also know well how it would offer certain freedom in another way.

[McGurk]

I don't see why it's so surprising. I took the most extreme response to mean that it is absolutely not a kilt. I might have different ideas about how to wear the kilt or what it means personally than other people on this forum. Others might say "Mark, your kilt is too long/short; your hose are too high/low" but we're all talking about a kilt. Germany has Männerröcke which are like the same thing as these full length "kilts", but they're labelled "Röcke" (skirts) instead of "kilts".
Far be it from me to discriminate against what people "can" and "can't" wear. But please don't call that a kilt.

Reading that, I think missunderstanding the emphisis of the question is probably what lead to my suprise. When I hear the word 'kilt' the garment I first think of is the knee length one, taloured with pleats and apron. However, I also recognise the great plaid when its refered to as a kilt.
When I saw the question "Would you wear a "Full Length" Kilt?" and the one shown was held as an example. I assumed that for the purpose of answering the question, we where to assume (or at least accept that Erisianmonkey assumed) that the "Full Length" Kilt was a kilt. That is the angle I took the question from. I personaly didnt think the question was asking if we thought it was a kilt or not.

There is a good case for it being refered to as a kilt, in my mind. If we assume the great plaid is what the kilt developed from, then the kilt could be worn in many more ways then what is common. The great plaid was a very versitile piece of clothing (or piece of cloth) that could be worn at any length and in any fasion.

[Zardoz]

isn't that sort of like a male 'hostess skirt' ? http://www.scottishclansman.com/skirthostess.html