Please explain...

[Makeitstop]

Two things:First, it's not my definition. I plucked it fromTHE ILLUSTRATED ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SCOTLAND. Second, sure, those most definitely are kilts. From what I can see they appear to be shaped, and thickly pleated. That someone has added pockets (my 15 year old "Hill Walker" has concealed pockets) doesn't significantly alter the garment any more than box pleats would.

However, I do stand by my statement that the "quasi-kilt", by definition, isn't really a kilt.

I would argue with your definition of a kilt. You've taken a description of a kilt from an encyclopedia (one that is specifically about Scotland), and then added to it by describing some common features of traditional kilts, then declared those to be the criteria which determine whether or not a garment is a kilt. So yes, this is your definition of a kilt. And it is inherently flawed (at least, for the purposes of this discussion) because you defined a kilt with a description of a traditional kilt, and then said if it doesn't meet the definition, it isn't a kilt. You're defining kilts as being traditional kilts, then saying that non-traditional kilts aren't kilts, and pointing to your definition as evidence. It's a little circular, don't you think?

So, let's just check a dictionary for a definition. From websters:

1 : a knee-length pleated skirt usually of tartan worn by men in Scotland and by Scottish regiments in the British armies
2 : a garment that resembles a Scottish kilt

If you don't like that one, here's a whole bunch to choose from

I think this is a bit more usable as a definition. A pleated knee-length manskirt. Works for me.

[Rex_Tremende]

Oops. You said "mainstream."

My bad.

[Beertigger]

This conversation has grown tiresome...

Now is the time on Xmarks when we dance.

[Jimmy]

Beertigger, just looking at your avatar which is Ireland, just like a teddy bear,there is a great song by the Wolfetones called the Teddy Bear's Head

[J.B. Simpson]

Damn! I read this thread from beginning to end an all I got was a headache.

Come on guys.We have em,so wear an enjoy them.

I could care less if you have ten pockets-made out of Zebra skin-Its pink-or what ever-if I pass you on the street an it looks like a kilt I will give you a thumbs up.

[Jake_S]

I purchased an AmeriKilt last summer, because I always wanted a kilt, but didn't like the prices for traditional. The AK was in my price range, and let me find out for myself if being a Kiltee was right for me, turns out it is.

When I purchased my kilt I was not aware of any Scottish ancestry, all of my ancestors (that I knew of) had English names. I found out yesterday that I do have some Scottish ties through a maternal gggggg-grandmother (Fleming, aligned with Murray of Atholl), so now I am looking at a traditional tank in an Ancient Murray of Atholl tartan.

That's my reason for a non-traditional kilt.

Jake

[Mr. MacDougall]

Okay, let me start out by saying that I'm an American. My family has been here in the USA since before there was one, and in Arizona since the 1850's. Along the way, we've braided in strands of DNA from all over the world... there's hardly a part of Europe I can't point to and say, "my ancestors came from there!"

As it happens, some of those ancestors came from the Islands and Highlands. When I joined this forum, I chose to emphasize that connexion through my choice of forum user name. But it's far from the only part of my heritage in which I take pride.

The first kilt which I purchased for myself was a Buzz Kidder canvas, in Navy Blue, because Buzz was at the Tucson Highland Games, and I could afford it. I ended up only wearing it a couple of times, before it got lost in a move. (For which, by the way, I could just weep).

My first kilt which I wore on a regular basis was a SportKilt in US Navy tartan. I wore it to near the point of destruction, and loved it. Still love it, for around-the-house. Why US Navy? Because I'm a veteran, because I felt a connexion with it, and because it's a handsome tartan. I was still buying into the idea of "entitlement" to tartan, and I felt far more entitled to the US Navy's tartan than to the MacDougall tartan -- which SportKilt doesn't offer, anyway.

Now, a couple years on, I have gravitated away from the contemporary style. Putting one's hands in one's trouser pockets is simply Not Done in my family, so that's not a good reason for me to seek pockets. I kind of like Steve from BC's hidden pockets, for the placing of "stuff," but it's my feeling that large cargo pockets ruin the line of the kilt. Just in case you missed it, let me emphasize, it is my feeling that large cargo pockets ruin the line of the kilt.

However, I'm very attracted to kilts in sturdy fabrics. I'm pondering (when I have more money than I do now) getting a leather RKilt, or one of FreedomKilts' more traditional looks in their Carhardt-style fabric, because I think I'd like to try wearing them for working in the garden and so on. Well. The leather would probably be general wear, but you understand where I'm going.

My point is that there are different kilts for different purposes. My MacMedic kilt that cost me $500 is not a pub-crawlin' kilt. My Celtic Croft "Ancient" kilt is not a going to class kilt. My SWK standards are not work in the garden (or the garage) kilts.

If all you want is a special occasion kilt, then all you need is a tank. But for those of us who want to wear 'em on a daily basis, for going to school, for being social with the lads (or the lasses), for working on greasy equipment or standing at the forge, we want different things.

And one part of Scottish heritage that I highly admire is the willingness to look for ways to adapt what we have to what we need, and to invent new ways of doing things when we have to.

[McFarkus]

I Am New To Kilts, But I Was Drawn To Them As I Am Of Scottish Decent. I Like Them Because They Are Comfortable. For Me Personally I Like The Tartan Choices. I Prefer To Have Them With Family Connections. I Would Say I Am Drawn More To A Traditional Non Pocket Kilt, But In Today's World Pockets Are Almost A Must. I Think Basic Economics And The Law Of Supply And Demand Will Solve This. If There Is No Need The Item Becomes A Fad And Quickly Fades. If It Last There Is A Need And Group That Enjoy The Product. All Kilts W / Wo Pockets, Wool, Or Other Fabric, Solid Or Tartan Serve A Roll In Expanding Our Kilted Community.:d

Currently all my kilts are tartan - one handsewn in Scotland and the other two are heavyweight Stillwater kilts. So, I'm fairly traditional. I did, however, just order a Stillwater economy kilt in Irish National tartan for St. Patrick's day. I won't be wearing it often, and it's washable. None of these have pockets, but, laddie, that's what a sporran is for (I own two Thorfinn sporrans).

On the other hand, I've been thinking about getting a contemporary model from Utilikilts, R-Kilts or Alphakilts. I really like the idea of the hemp kilt from R-Kilts. I don't see what the big fuss is about. No one would wear one of these kilts with an Argyll or Prince Charlie jacket to a formal event. We're talking about the difference between dress trousers (there, I said the T word) and blue jeans. What's the big deal?

[JamieKerr]

Just a quick thought on the topic of what is and is not a kilt...

A friend of mine had a hysterectomy. Another friend of mine had ovarian cancer and had to have her ovaries removed. Are these two individuals no longer women because they lack a characteristic of what it means to be a woman? I have waist length hair. Because our society thinks men should have short hair, does the fact I don't have short hair make me not male?

My point in posting that is to provide an example of defining what something is or isn't in a more relevant manner which more of us might understand.

I have five kilts. One is in my family's tartan, 3 are in military tartans, and one is a solid. In the pants world I own tight leather pants, I own pants that appear to be snake skin, courderoy, jeans, pin stripes, and any number of plain black dress pants. All of these items are pants. The only difference between them is which pair I would or would not wear in different settings.

I wear kilts for a number of reasons. Firstly, my grandfather was a Kerr. Wearing the kilt for me is a sign of respect and way of showing my relatives that family is important for me. I wear a kilt because its far more comfortable than pants. I wear the kilt because we as men need more choices than pants or pants in what we wish to wear. And lastly, simply because I want to.

[enyapj18]

As a personal choice, I don’t wear wool or leather. Companies like Utilikilts & Amerikilts give me options that don’t compromise my beliefs.

John