Another Question

[BoldHighlander]

If you're self-concious about it but want to try it, start off wearing it around the house, then out the back garden, then to get the mail... Step by step!

Like many other subjects there will be views expressed by diehards on both sides. But do not at least be put off from trying it out in the privacy of your own home and seeing how it feels compared with the "wee trews."

And in the end I think this is the best advice on the subject.
Have fun with it, no matter which route you take

[McClef]

Highland dancers don't twirl and they don't jump up and down. You will not find those words in our textbooks. They are also required to wear an undergarment that is black or tones with the kilt. No white.

I don't access to how things are put in such textbooks, I was only observing on what I have seen them do and putting them in my own words - to indicate the greater vigour of their steps and motion.

I am fully aware that they are required to wear undergarments, for the exceptional reasons that I cited.

[Zardoz]

I made a couple of false starts at mentioning this in the current "kilt check" thread, because a newer member PM'd me about it. But I didn't see an opening that didn't seem a thread jack. But the topic is open here, so look out, I'm gonna share...

I'll be honest and say that while I'm regimental most of the time, I will at times go with some dark colored briefs. I know a lot of people say they will wear something "in the presence of ladies or children", but like McClef said, I don't think I'm any more likely to accidently be seen at that time than another. In fact, my greatest exposure to kids is at renfaires, and I am pretty much always regimental there. My use of briefs is more for my comfort than concern for the safety of others...

I have a couple of things that help me decide on this as I get dressed for the day;
One is Wind, If I'm gonna be out and about on a very windy day, I'll throw on some briefs. At Tartan day last year, we had 30-35 mph winds at the SanJacinto monument, the park rangers took the state flags down. The ceremony had to be moved inside. The winds between the buildings downtown during our St.Pat's parade can be an issue too. And yeah I know, a 10 yard, 22oz, hand riveted, assult vehicle etc... won't move in a tornado.. I generally wear USA Semi-trads in 11 oz PV, and wind can be an issue.

Another is Hygine. One of the nice things about the PV kilts is they are washable if I have a "bathroom related" slip-up. But sometimes when I wear my wool kilt, or I know I'm going to wear the same kilt multiple days, in a row, I will throw some thing on under it. Likewise heat can be an issue. It can be very hot and humid around here, and on a 95 degree/100% humidity /no breeze day, all that material gets warm! And sometimes I'd rather those areas of my body sweat, stick to, and stink up some drawers before my kilts. For renfaire I have some long shirts that help with this, but none of my regular shirts are long enough to make a difference.

I hate to hear newbies broach the regimental question and be handed all the cool sounding advice like "wearing boxers under a kilt is like wearing a hat in the swimming pool" etc.. like they're a sissy if they don't want to go regimental on their first day out. Most guys will have enough on their minds not wearing p@nts in public for the first time without being told they're not doing it right because of underwear.
I think hyperbole like that might even scare off some guys from trying to wear a kilt. What you wear under a kilt should be what you are comfortable with, and is no one's business.

[ccga3359]

I re-read your original post and now, to me, it seems you are starting a discussion on first time regimental rather than asking for support. I apologize.


My first time regimental was also my first night out in a kilt. It was a kilt night with the inaugural meeting of SOKS (Southern Ontario Kilt Society). As the name suggests it in an area that sees all four seasons and in extreme. This night was mid winter the temperature a -25C (-13F). Although it didn't need to be mention it was just common knowledge that all were regimental. The topic came up when outside for a cigarette I was subjected to an icy blast. The seasoned enjoyed the gentle breeze and chuckled as the newbie, me, was caught off guard and it showed. I was self conscious of going out in public reggie for all of 5 minutes and not apprehensive at all.

Going regimental is not an option but rather my choice. As stated before if someone decides that he dons under garments I absolutly fine with it and will not try to bring him over to the dark side. Because as stated before, that simply is not my business. I'm sure the vast majority on this forum go regimental and without any need for deciding, I bet you'll be hard pressed to find someone here that is adamant opposed to underwear.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I have never understood why being in the presence of ladies or children should carry any greater risk of exposure than anything else.

I'm going to stop you right here. If there is the least possible risk of giving offense, then a gentleman goes to what ever lengths necessary to insure that he does not cause offense.

I don't care what has, or has not occurred in your presence, because that is beside the point. We're (or rather I'm) talking about gentlemanly behaviour and I am sure that as a gentleman you too would not wish to inadvertently give offense.

Now, despite what you and others may have said, I'm afraid that none of it alters, in one iota, how a gentleman should behave or dress. Diehard traditionalist that I am (and damn proud of it), I would repeat that "in the presence of ladies or children trews should be worn under the kilt". I am not alone in that opinion; I am amply supported by the likes of Loudon McQueen Douglas writing in 1914, by the regulations laid down for dress worn at court since Highland attire has been allowed, and by virtually every book or booklet on modern Highland attire published prior to "So You're Going To Wear The Kilt".

It is sometimes forgotten that gentlemen who are wearing the kilt for the first time are, perhaps, less comfortable with that mode of dress. The frankly stupid mythologies that surround the wearing of the kilt do nothing to put them at their ease. So in my opinion, reinforcing those myths is far less helpful than suggesting socially acceptable alternatives.

[NewGuise]

The first time I wore a kilt, very long ago, for a production of Brigadoon, I didn't even own a pair of underpants. Habits change. However, when I first wore a kilt of my own, far more recently, I still didn't once consider wearing anything under it. On my first trip outside, I suddenly felt a cool breeze up the kilt, which to me felt good, not remotely nervous-making. There was a later occasion, a very cold winter evening, when I nearly lost my footing on some ice and realized that falling, in a kilt, could involve hazards aside from bruises. I just walked a little more carefully, which is hardly a bad thing.

[SteveB]

MoR has made a valid point.

I am around some very young children every Sunday as a religion instructor. I have the wee trews for those occasions. More than once I have had one or more of the wee uns attached to my pleats during some activity. I do not care to explain anatomy to them or their parents.

As a gentleman, I dress appropriately to the occasion.

I have rarely worn the wee trews inside trousers at any time in my life. I started wearing them when shorts stopped being both short and became rather baggy. While seated at an outdoor event, I realized that the large tubes of cloth that were the legs of the new style "shorts" provided an up channel view if I were not careful.

Slainte

[Riverkilt]

I remember the first time I went kilted and regimental - it was a different feeling - but a feeling of FREEDOM.

I find that kilts are a much more modest garment than most forms of pants. With a kilt your boy parts are well covered by two layers of cloth and perhaps a sporran. Pants on the other hand often reveal the outline of your boy parts...a much less modest presentation.

While I greatly enjoy the FREEDOM of going regimental when kilted, I choose to wear black cotton boxers if I'm going to be around small children. Helps insure I'm not misunderstood.

[McClef]

MOR what might be considered as potentially offensive in 1914 is not necessarily the same in 2010.

And I have to say that cultural differences and attitudes can vary considerably between this side of the Atlantic and yours.

To infer that one is potentially less of a gentleman for not assessing "the least possible risk of inadvertently giving offence" before setting forth is verging on insult and suggests that to follow that logic one would always have to be attired less than regimentally.

Of course there may be situations where an individual may decide that a situation carries greater potential risk than others and decide to err on the side of caution. I do not have any problem with that whatsoever.

But it does not follow that modesty requires the sacrifice of comfort in all situations when one applies the risk compensation factor - the greater the perceived risk, the more careful one's reaction and demeanour.

It is difficult indeed when out and about to avoid ladies and/or children in the streets and shops. They may be potentially offended by the fact that one is even kilted - the number of times I have heard "mummy why is that man wearing a skirt" I have lost count of. I have even been accused by a woman in the street of "being dressed like a woman." The fact that she was wearing trousers apparently escaped her.

If one worried about every risk then getting out of bed in the morning would be potentially dangerous. One would never fly or drive or cross the road.

I would define a gentleman by how he treats others and his courtesy. I hold a door open so that a lady may pass through or give up my seat to one on a bus and help them with heavy luggage. I am not always even thanked.

I am sorry that you do not see experience as having value in the making of gentlemanly decisions. Chaucer's Wife of Bath would certainly not agree with you.

[Woodsman]

It is difficult indeed when out and about to avoid ladies and/or children in the streets and shops.

Yes, actually I would prefer to meet the ladies while kilted. I always feel that they are more understanding and accepting of a man in a kilt. Perhaps it's sharing a common bond even if they are in p**ts at the time.

It definitely is best to wear the kilt around and about at home before venturing out regardless of what one chooses to wear or not wear underneath. You can experiment with movement -tying shoes, sitting down, bending over, running, etc to learn how your particular kilt moves and how you should move with it. Wearing the kilt makes you more aware of your movements, your body and yourself. I will go so far as to say it makes you more aware of being alive.