The reasons will be different for everyone. For some, it's just fun or traditional. For others, it's practical. For some, even, it's medical. One member here recently posted that he broke his leg and can't fit pants around his cast. Voila! Kilt to the rescue!

There are a couple of practical reasons I prefer a kilt over other clothing, but these are specific to me.

First, my hips are lopsided. When I wear pants, they sit crooked. My right hip (or at least, where my pants end up resting) is lower than the left. So my right pant leg seems longer than my left. But when I wear a kilt up on my natural waist, the problem goes away. This doesn't mean I can't wear pants, but it shows why I prefer a kilt.

But more importantly, a kilt is immensely more comfortable and practical than pants. Let's face it; a man's anatomy was not meant to be bunched up. I don't know what sadist came up with the idea of wearing a garment that intentionally constricts the male anatomy, but I'd like to slap him. It is well known that wearing garments that constrict the male reproductive organs can cause reproductive problems (i.e. low sperm count) as well as sexual (performance) problems. Doctors tell men who are trying to have children to wear boxer shorts at the very least, and find any method to allow their 'equipment' to be like nature intended. Free.

So kilts are a great solution to this. And if you'll notice, almost every culture in the world has clothing that originated without bifurcated legs. Look at the Middle East. What is their traditional clothing? It ain't pants. Look at Africa, India, even the Native American tribes. Most of Europe, too, once wore unbifurcated garments (Romans, Greeks, etc.). They all developed clothing that didn't restrict the male anatomy. So the kilt, while unique, has a lot of precedent around the world in terms of the basic design. It covers one up modestly, while still allowing freedom of movement and no pain.