Dress Codes

[Jock Scot]

I have found it's not the Scots who challenge a person's right to wear a kilt, but rather non-Scots who have heard rumors or misinformation and then feel they should "correct" the offender.

Those Scots(not all do) that have misgivings about their National attire being worn by others(particularly under the guise of their own, non Scots, National attire) are generally far too polite to say anything, particularly in public, but it would be a mistake to assume that their thinking is necessarily happy.

[Lyle1]

On the other hand...

( I think I'd still wear a suit! )

If I had a kilt with me in Hong Kong, I would wear it for the reasons stated by CMcG. Judging from the photographs of the attendees from a previous year, I doubt very much that anyone is going to challenge anyone on their apparel! Further, social attitudes have changed to the degree that anyone challenging the appropriateness of wearing the ethnic costume of their ancestors would most probably be considered quite rude and very out of touch. At best that person would be considered a social anachronism, at least by most people under the age of 50.

[Lyle1]

Those Scots(not all do) that have misgivings about their National attire being worn by others(particularly under the guise of their own, non Scots, National attire) are generally far too polite to say anything, particularly in public, but it would be a mistake to assume that their thinking is necessarily happy.

Their reticence to voice their opinion is appreciated, but their opinion is obviously not not so much a concern to anyone outside of Scotland.

I do not voice this opinion to be rude, but the truth is that most of the men who wear kilts were not born in Scotland! In The United States of America, alone, the number of people who claim Scottish descent exceeds the entire population of Scotland. The negative opinions of a few people in Scotland might be of some interest, but they are certainly not regarded as binding on the rest of the world.

[davidg]

The negative opinions of a few people in Scotland might be of some interest, but they are certainly not regarded as binding on the rest of the world.

I quite agree, although it is still worth bearing in mind that they exist

It raises the question, though, of who is Scottish. It is possible to have a Scottish identity even as a citizen of a foreign land and it is possible to have a Scottish identity when born in a foreign land but living in Scotland

This was recognised in the last Scottish census, when people living in Scotland were invited to declare their identity, as opposed to simple ethnicity. There are, as an example, many born in England who have lived so long in Scotland they now consider themselves Scottish, but there are equally many people born in Scotland who have lived for a long time in England but still consider themselves Scottish. If your ancestors were Scottish and/or you identify as Scottish then there really should be no problem

[Jock Scot]

Their reticence to voice their opinion is appreciated, but their opinion is obviously not not so much a concern to anyone outside of Scotland.

I do not voice this opinion to be rude, but the truth is that most of the men who wear kilts were not born in Scotland! In The United States of America, alone, the number of people who claim Scottish descent exceeds the entire population of Scotland. The negative opinions of a few people in Scotland might be of some interest, but they are certainly not regarded as binding on the rest of the world.

You are of course quite correct it is not binding on the rest of the world, although some may think that is rather arrogant with someone else's National attire to claim it as their own.

However, my post was in reply to David D's post where he was commenting on the lack of complaint from the Scots over the kilt and I was just pointing out that whilst some Scots may not say anything, they may be thinking quite a lot.

When all said and done the kilt is Scotland's National attire---no one else's-----and some Scots might (OK, are) be distinctly unhappy if a non Scot is wearing the kilt to an event under the guise of it being THEIR (non Scot) National attire, even if the Scots are too polite to say so.

To wear the kilt on other occasions, by non Scots, is pretty much accepted these days by most Scots I think, but another person from a different nation to claim the kilt as THEIR national attire and wear it to a do, is stretching a point more than somewhat!

[kilted scholar]

Jock Scot: "When all said and done the kilt is Scotland's National attire---no one else's-----and some Scots might (OK, are) be distinctly unhappy if a non Scot is wearing the kilt to an event under the guise of it being THEIR (non Scot) National attire, even if the Scots are too polite to say so. "

This is not entirely correct. As CMcG has pointed out, the Canadian government encourages its citizens to wear the national costumes of their ancestors as their national attire. Moreover, Scots have played a foundational role in Canada, as we well know.

Well done, CMcG: to follow one's ancestors is very highly regarded in east Asia and it does not surprise me that you were well received!

[Peter Crowe]

I quite agree, although it is still worth bearing in mind that they exist

It raises the question, though, of who is Scottish. It is possible to have a Scottish identity even as a citizen of a foreign land and it is possible to have a Scottish identity when born in a foreign land but living in Scotland

This was recognised in the last Scottish census, when people living in Scotland were invited to declare their identity, as opposed to simple ethnicity. There are, as an example, many born in England who have lived so long in Scotland they now consider themselves Scottish, but there are equally many people born in Scotland who have lived for a long time in England but still consider themselves Scottish. If your ancestors were Scottish and/or you identify as Scottish then there really should be no problem

I think you are right to point up this complexity (and inclusivity) David. While pride in one's family (and it's national origin) heritage is fine, I think we tread on very shaky ground when we try to define Scots as a discrete ethnicity (as opposed to nationality). For those of us whose ancestors have long inhabited Scotland are ourselves of mixed heritage (Scotti, Picti, Brytthonic, Angles, Saxons, Norse, Normans, Flemings, and whomever preceded these groups) having very similar DNA to our neighbours throughout the rest of Great Britain and Ireland.

Sorry to deviate from the OP's question, but I am just responding to how this discussion has developed over the last few posts.

[Laird_M]

Maintaining the deviation...

This melting pot culture is what makes any culture stronger.
My wife is Sri Lankan, I'm of Scots descent and our boys enjoy the mix of cultures and rejoice in both side of their heritage. At the Ceilidh on Saturday I wore a kilt and the boys wore Asian dress.
Everyone commented on how well dressed we all were. We were wearing 'ethnic' clothing appropriate to our family culture, so dress code does vary with nationality, but can make for interesting conversation when meeting new people.

[CMcG]

<snip>
Sorry to deviate from the OP's question, but I am just responding to how this discussion has developed over the last few posts.

I think we are right on topic Peter, but national attire appears to be a more contentious dress code than even "formal" or "semi-formal"

What is a nationality? Is it defined by paperwork and politics?

Where does ethnicity fit it? Is heritage part of nationality?

For me, identity trumps -- and yet is formed by -- nationality, ethnicity, heritage, culture, and education.

I find even the idea of a nation to be somewhat problematic because it assumes a stable geo-political body that is actually quite flexible. Furthermore, nations are rarely culturally homogeneous. Borders exist on maps but are not so clear in lived experience, and a passport can define a nationality that does not entirely reflect one's identity. "National attire" is therefor a somewhat hollow term because the meaning of nationality is still, in many cases, debatable.

-----------------------

Jock Scot, I apologize for any offence I may have caused you. Rest assured that I wore the kilt well, even if I blurred the lines of what national attire might be...

[Peter Crowe]

I think we are right on topic Peter, but national attire appears to be a more contentious dress code than even "formal" or "semi-formal"

What is a nationality? Is it defined by paperwork and politics?

Where does ethnicity fit it? Is heritage part of nationality?

For me, identity trumps -- and yet is formed by -- nationality, ethnicity, heritage, culture, and education.

I find even the idea of a nation to be somewhat problematic because it assumes a stable geo-political body that is actually quite flexible. Furthermore, nations are rarely culturally homogeneous. Borders exist on maps but are not so clear in lived experience, and a passport can define a nationality that does not entirely reflect one's identity. "National attire" is therefor a somewhat hollow term because the meaning of nationality is still, in many cases, debatable.

-----------------------

Jock Scot, I apologize for any offence I may have caused you. Rest assured that I wore the kilt well, even if I blurred the lines of what national attire might be...

I quite agree with you about the malleability and inadequacy of a term like nationality, however, I was using it as distinct from citizenship and in the context of Scotland which has had a relatively stable boundary since the 16th century, and a definable identity since the time of King David I in the 12th century.

To comment further on davidg's point I would not deny the right of a hypothetical person (for the sake of discussion) who was born in Canada with Scots born great-grandparent(s) to self-identify as a Scot or Scottish-Canadian (or however otherwise qualified), nor would I deny the right of some guys I knew at school in west-central Scotland whose parents came from the Punjab to self-identify as Scots, (or Asian Scots, Punjabi Scots, Muslim Scots, Pakistani Scots etc.). To do so would be to presume an arbitrary authority I don't have and (figuratively speaking) to disinherit my own son of his birthright through me and my antecedent family.

In any event while I respect and agree with most of Jock Scot's sage contributions here, I disagree with his view on the exclusivity of THCD to a particular group of people inhabiting a particular place. When I disagree with someone, I am careful not to be disagreeable, rude, or offensive.