Women in kilts

[DWFII]

You said it yourself, these are actually your rules for yourself, based on some nebulous perception of society. You already wear a kilt, which is outside the norm, why cling to other "rules" without examining them to see if they make sense to YOU?

I'm not so sure. I tend to agree with O'Callaghan, and I don't think it is simply because we are imposing spurious rules on ourselves. The Creator...or evolution (choose whatever religion you feel most comfortable with)...made sure that men and women were different. Made sure that we look different, think different, and react to situations differently. There is a purpose there...either a "higher purpose" or an evolutionary one. What? Well, survival comes to mind.

If a reluctance to blur those distinctions makes sense to a person it is probably because we are hard-wired to be most comfortable with them.

Conversely, the desire to obscure such differences implies a discomfort or, just as likely, a dissatisfaction, with oneself. Maybe it isn't true, but to those who are a little more hard-wired than others the implication is there and stark.

It also implies a certain discomfort with the whole concept of "otherness." That which is not like ourselves. Ying yang. Etc..

What makes me uncomfortable, is the notion that we cannot tolerate sexual dimorphism in our social vision...that we have to, or that it is desirable to, suppress it at every turn. Because in the end, one thing leads to another and soon all individuality, all idiosyncrasy, all eccentricity, becomes suspect.

I'd hate like the devil to think that what was once a male garment with a glorious history and overtly masculine associations should, because of a rather misguided (in my opinion) impulse to proselytize the kilt to anyone and everyone, become the foundation for a unisex garment that further blurs the distinctions between individuals and brings us closer to a society of faceless (and sexless) drones. It would be ironic.

But then it has already happened with trousers...now that is ironic.

[Ealisaid]

Men and women will always be able to tell each other apart. Our instinctive awareness of sexual dimorphism will see to that.

Women who choose to wear the kilt are not necessarily unhappy to be women, nor trying to blur gender distinctions. (Lady Chrystel does come to mind as a dashing example of a lovely lady in the kilt.)

The gender distinctions between men and women that may be threatened by our wearing the kilt quite possibly exist only in men's (and perhaps some women's) minds. I doubt that God or the gods care about our clothing, but rather our character within.

[DWFII]

I have no desire to argue this. It's all just "he said, she said." All I wanted to do was offer a perspective that was different from what is popularly held...at least in this society at this moment in time.

That said, I want to point out that if anyone takes a bare moment to think about it, I suspect that they will realize that the business with Lady Chrystal is a red herring. I never said anything about Lady Chrystal. Women do look good in kilts. She looks good in a kilt. Dustin Hoffman looked good in a dress.

The question is whether the kilt is a "man's garment" as everybody (almost without exception) on this forum so unequivocally asserts, or whether it is something else...or on the way to becoming something else.

Parenthetically...since many here wear the kilt to honour their Scottish ancestry...and ostensibly to show respect...let's ask our great-great-great-great grandfathers what they thought of women in kilts. Or ask their wives, for that matter.

Just two cents for the kitty...your mileage may vary.

[GDub]

I have no desire to argue this. It's all just "he said, she said." ...let's ask our great-great-great-great grandfathers what they thought of women in kilts. Or ask their wives, for that matter.

Just two cents for the kitty...your mileage may vary.

You are explicitly arguing a "he said, she said," but with no possibility of resolution.

Personally, I could care less what my great-great-great-great grandfather thought about women--at all! Maybe he was ahead of his time, but the odds are against it. Sorry, but my mileage definitely varies.

[Christo13]

There's been a sentiment expressed that women wearing the kilt is taking yet another thing away from men. That doesn't seem very manly to say that.

When my wife, Cynthia, wears her kilt, it looks like a skirt on her. She is taking nothing away from me. Even if she wore a sporran, hose, flashes, etc., it would take nothing from me, nor any man.

If we are going to say it is truly a man's garment, and only a man's garment, then if I stand next to a women also in a kilt, I will be the one standing tall and proud. The woman beside me will take nothing away from me; she will blur no lines or water down perceptions of the garment.

I understand the history of the kilt and I can even understand standing on the tradition that it only be worn by men. But if I stand on old tradition, a woman's place is in the home to serve me, and I not only like an independent woman, I like an independent woman who can wear a kilt or a kilted skirt to a kilt night with me.

When Cynthia and I stand side by side in our kilts, people know I'm wearing a kilt. They see Cynthia's kilt at her knees and see it as a skirt. If she were wearing a kilted skirt, they would see it as a woman's garment.

I'm not going to wear a kilted skirt, but if a guy wanted to wear one, more power to them! If some people want to blur the lines of what is masculine and feminine, so be it--people have that right.

I know when I'm in the kilt that I'm a man. I know that when Cynthia is in the kilt that she's a woman. Those who blur the lines, whether by choice or by simply being who they've been since birth, have that right, too.

History changes. Fortunately, so many things that were once "tradition" are no longer viewed as the norm. Students of history will know that the kilt was a male garment. Most will still see it as a male garment.

When a woman like Cynthia or Lady Chrystal wears a kilt, it's obvious they are women. Sure, they are wearing a "male garment," but I'd hardly say Cynthia takes anything from me and that Lady Chrystal takes anything from Robert.

If anything, having a sweetie who wears a kilt or kilted skirt enhances the experience.

Some can argue that since I was born in America that I'm not entitled to the kilt, since it was histroically worn in Scotland. Some would say that while they respect my right to honor my Scottish great grandmother and Danish great grandfather, that it's a garment I shouldn't wear.

All I wanted to do was offer a perspective that was different from what is popularly held...at least in this society at this moment in time.

I admire the stance you've taken. Obviously, I see things differently, but I can understand your arguments.

There are so many levels to the "Who can wear the kilt?" argument, though. It comes down to this for me: people have free will. If a woman wants to wear the kilt, she has the right. If you want to defend the history of the garment, you have that right. And if others want to throw in their opinion, they have that right.

I enjoy threads like this because they bring out different views.

I'm not afraid of women taking aways the kilt from men, and I'm not afraid of discussing different points of view--especially with people who appreciate the kilt in different ways.

Christopher

[Alan H]

MUST we beat this extremely dead horse into the ground yet AGAIN? We just closed a thread on this exact subject, with this exact title, a couple of days ago.

There's a difference of opinion on the issue. Enough, already.

[GDub]

Not to be a troublemaker, but the horse was hardly dead.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I appreciate the sense of decorum that pervades this forum so I'll shut up now.

Slainte

[DWFII]

MUST we beat this extremely dead horse into the ground yet AGAIN? We just closed a thread on this exact subject, with this exact title, a couple of days ago.

There's a difference of opinion on the issue. Enough, already.

May I ask a question or two...as respectfully and as gently as I can muster?

Must all these discussions on this forum be non-controversial? Must everyone always agree? Must the popular and consensus opinion always be the final word?

What is a forum if it is not a marketplace of ideas? Isn't self censorship still censorship?

Didn't the above quoted post effectively close this discussion?

I suppose I'll catch the devil for asking these questions...and I apologize if I have offended anyone, at any time...but it makes me wonder if I understand what this forum is all about.

[Larry124]

MUST we beat this extremely dead horse into the ground yet AGAIN? We just closed a thread on this exact subject, with this exact title, a couple of days ago.

There's a difference of opinion on the issue. Enough, already.

[Panache]

May I ask a question or two...as respectfully and as gently as I can muster?

Must all these discussions on this forum be non-controversial? Must everyone always agree? Must the popular and consensus opinion always be the final word?

What is a forum if it is not a marketplace of ideas? Isn't self censorship still censorship?

Didn't the above quoted post effectively close this discussion?

I suppose I'll catch the devil for asking these questions...and I apologize if I have offended anyone, at any time...but it makes me wonder if I understand what this forum is all about.

Todd (a.k.a cajunscot) has a marvelous quote that he (and the entire Moderating Staff) here thoroughly believe in:

"Because you disagree doesn't mean you have to be disagreeable"

So you are asking is it alright to disagree here on XMTS?

The answer is...

Absolutely!

But...

You must present your thoughts in a civil, respectful, pleasant, and friendly manner.

When you debate you should try to quote sources and use "I Statements".

Then everything is Jake.

When your thoughts are presented otherwise... well then threads get pulled.... because here on XMTS we are all ladies and gentlemen.

And we will show respect for all our members.

Posts and threads that do not fit with our community and our culture are closed or pulled.

Restrictive?

yes

Old Fashioned?

absolutely!

But this construct of the computer age, this Internet forum, this amalgamation of people's thoughts and opinions from across the world, this online community whose membership includes so many different ages, religions, sexes, sexualities, races, and nationalities, is something special...

...a informative,fun, family friendly place where all gentle peoples are welcome.

Let's keep that in mind everyone!


Respectfully

Jamie