Black Tie means a bow tie not a black coloured tie

[macwilkin]

Todd ,yet again , I think you read too much in a post:- nowhere does it say in bikelounger's post that rural folk resent all manner of proper attire... he simply said clothes should be appropriate for work!

You comment "I'm afraid this post is just as judgemental of those of us who take pride in our formal attire as the people who judge those who do not wear it." really doesn't follow, as he is not judging anyone else , merely saying that black tie isn't for him!

Please don't think I'm against your having your own opinions, but it's an observation that you feel that "proper attire"(your words) is being attacked ,and clearly in this post it wasn't, that poster obviously isn't one for the full black number, but he didn't say that other kilt wearer couldn't or shouldn't.

Paul,

Regardless of the original intention of the poster (and his replies regarding my initial reply do clarify his meaning), you must admit that there is some "inverse snobbery" at Xmarks regarding traditionalists. That was my point.

In regards to work clothes, yes, the kilt originally was "field kit" -- but like those who say that kilts must evolve or die, why can't a kilt evolve from "field kit" to "formal wear"? Remember, a traditional kilt can be used for both.

Respectfully,

Todd

[Paul Henry]

Todd, this goes round and round....... you feel that there is an "inverse snobbery" on occasion, no argument from me.

I've always thought kilts are for all, whatever their feelings on matter of "proper attire".I enjoy wearing the kilt in very a traditional style or with pushed down socks, and goodness knows all styles in between. I worn a kilt in high and low places,and hope that I fitted in , whatever the occasion.

Black tie events aren't generally my milleau, but if I'm asked then I will wear what is asked for and appropriate, but at the other times I've worn kilts on the beach with bare feet!

Some of my kilts are likely seen as an front to some , and other kilts might be far to traditional for some.That is the beauty of the kilt, it can be worn in many different ways.

I suppose I'm puzzled why you always weigh in defence of traditional kilt wearing when I really do think that most of us do wear kilts traditionally, with a flair and a dedication, because the bottom line is, that we enjoy wearing them

[macwilkin]

And you, also, neglected to see that I was going for "over the top" to make my point. Note to self--folks around here don't understand my literary devices.

My apologies if I didn't understand your literary devices. My point was that your "literary device" in saying "too many" people who wear black tie & attend formal events were judgemental of you is not fair to everyone who does, nor is it absolutely correct.

Regards,

Todd

[macwilkin]

Todd, this goes round and round....... you feel that there is an "inverse snobbery" on occasion, no argument from me.

I've always thought kilts are for all, whatever their feelings on matter of "proper attire".I enjoy wearing the kilt in very a traditional style or with pushed down socks, and goodness knows all styles in between. I worn a kilt in high and low places,and hope that I fitted in , whatever the occasion.

Black tie events aren't generally my milleau, but if I'm asked then I will wear what is asked for and appropriate, but at the other times I've worn kilts on the beach with bare feet!

Some of my kilts are likely seen as an front to some , and other kilts might be far to traditional for some.That is the beauty of the kilt, it can be worn in many different ways.

I suppose I'm puzzled why you always weigh in defence of traditional kilt wearing when I really do think that most of us do wear kilts traditionally, with a flair and a dedication, because the bottom line is, that we enjoy wearing them

Paul,

Believe it or not, I agree with almost all of your post.

I defend traditionalists because at times on this forum, traditionalists take it on the chin from those who advocate a more non-traditionalist approach. If the kilt is about "freedom", then even those who choose to wear their kilts in a more traditional manner are free to do so.

I hope that makes sense. All points-of-view should be respected. I'm not going to tell you I'm wrong for wearing a certain style of kilt in a certain way, but if someone asks my opinion, I'll be honest and forthright in my reply.

Regards,

Todd

[bikeolounger]

Paul,

Regardless of the original intention of the poster (and his replies regarding my initial reply do clarify his meaning), you must admit that there is some "inverse snobbery" at Xmarks regarding traditionalists. That was my point.

In regards to work clothes, yes, the kilt originally was "field kit" -- but like those who say that kilts must evolve or die, why can't a kilt evolve from "field kit" to "formal wear"? Remember, a traditional kilt can be used for both.

Respectfully,

Todd

Todd, with all due respect: Yes, there are sentiments that can be construed as "inverse snobbery." There are also a TON of posts that show an even greater degree of kilt snobbery. That snobbery is what prompted my "over the top" post in the first place--the notion that one must own a traditional kilt to be able to say one owns a kilt (I am not willing to subject a $400+ garment to my lifestyle, and my lifestyle does not include full-on formal stuff).

Sure, I'd like to own a well-made semi-formal kilt in the tartan associated with my surname, in something other than a SportKilt, for wear on the rare occasion where a tie of any sort is appropriate. I've seen guys who (so my girlfriend tells me) look exceptionally dashing in their finery. Heck my girlfriend would probably tell you I would look as dashing if not more so (not that she's biased or anything). I don't begrudge anyone their ability to justify formal wear. It just isn't my scene.

It is good to read that you have figured out my point. I'll let it be a testament to my bad mood of the day (unrelated to anything on xmarks) that I didn't make it clear in the first place.

[bikeolounger]

My apologies if I didn't understand your literary devices. My point was that your "literary device" in saying "too many" people who wear black tie & attend formal events were judgemental of you is not fair to everyone who does, nor is it absolutely correct.

Regards,

Todd

Again, with due respect: "Any" snobbery, in either direction, could be considered "too much." As such, I was indeed correct in my statement. As for people judging me personally, it has happened. I have witnessed it. No, it is not an indictment of others who wear formal attire. Nor was it meant to be.

Remember: a subset of the whole is not necessarily a majority. "Too many" can be ten out of a thousand as easily as it can be ten out of eleven.

[macwilkin]

Again, with due respect: "Any" snobbery, in either direction, could be considered "too much." As such, I was indeed correct in my statement.

As for people judging me personally, it has happened. I have witnessed it. No, it is not an indictment of others who wear formal attire. Nor was it meant to be.

Remember: a subset of the whole is not necessarily a majority. "Too many" can be ten out of a thousand as easily as it can be ten out of eleven.

Fair enough; I certainly won't disagree with you that any snobbery is "too much", and I hope you'll agree with me that "inverse snobbery" is just as bad.

Sound fair?

Todd

[pdcorlis]

Is it a full moon?

[Clockwork John]

Is it a full moon?

There's definitely something going on...

But, this discussion has reminded me of why I love Xmarks... It has gotten a bit heated, there has been disagreement, but the parties involved have remained respectful, and remained gentlemen through the whole discussion. No name calling, no mud slinging, no underhanded comments... Just discussion.

[pdcorlis]

Yeah - we're really a class act - huh?