Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
One thing I note, when some members feel that the "kilt" police don't consider one style or another to be a kilt they get quite upset. I honestly don't understand this. In most cases I haven't seen opinions that say you shouldn't be allowed to wear it, that I would understand, but it seems to get people upset if their garment isn't considered to be a kilt by some others.

I admit I don't consider all the garments I see on these boards to be kilts, but I will vigorously defend anyones right to wear them. I don't mean to offend anyone with the question but I am curious as it is a theme I have seen repeated often on these boards.
Well I think the answer is quite obvious. If you deny that a garment is a kilt, which we all agree is a garment designed for, and traditionally worn by, men, then what is the alternative? In Western society I think we all know the answer.

Your statement that you'll defend some ones right to wear any garment they please rings hollow, if at the same time you effectively label said person a cross-dresser because their "kilt" doesn't meet your subjective criteria for what is a kilt.

Best regards,

Jake