Answer to "Why the Kilt?"

**Bugbear** · 31st December 07, 08:07 PM

Sorry everybody, I just found out that all of this has been covered in an old thread, and it isn't important anyway.

Originally Posted by cajunscot

My apologies -- I assumed you were asking about precedence.

T.

**davedove** · 2nd January 08, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by Ted Crocker

I've been agrovated by this myth that one can only ride a horse while wearing pants, and I don't mean side saddle either. Women, like my sister, ride in skirts non-side saddle. I would say under garments would probably be required though.

You certainly CAN ride a horse while kilted, but it's much easier in breeches. For one thing, the bare skin of the inner thighs rubbing against the saddle for extended periods of time would tend to make one sore.

I would venture to say that those who do ride kilted don't do it all day, everyday either. There may be a few of you, but not many.

If trousers weren't more practical for horseback, they never would have developed.

**Caddy One** · 2nd January 08, 04:38 PM

Exactly

**Bugbear** · 2nd January 08, 04:44 PM

******

**Bugbear** · 2nd January 08, 05:16 PM

Deleted.

**graham_s** · 2nd January 08, 05:20 PM

I know a few guys who ride in kilts.
I'm not going to tell them it's a skirt ;)

**Bugbear** · 2nd January 08, 05:44 PM

******

**Ian.MacAllan** · 3rd January 08, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by Ted Crocker

. . . would protect their legs from the saddle and all. . .

The real problem is not the saddle, it's the "and all", especially the stirrup leathers. They pinch the insides of the thighs (and calves if not booted). Of course, if one does not bother with stirrups . . .

.