The Tartan Police!

**Scotus** · 17th July 05, 01:07 PM

That's fine, Rob, but when you say that kilts evolve, I hope you are not forgetting there are those who don't believe that the Utilikilt is really a kilt; therefore, not an evolution of the kilt.

**Dreadbelly** · 17th July 05, 01:22 PM

The kilt evolves whether you like it or not. It has gone from being a great kilt to what we wear today... If you don't like evolution, your 8 yard traditional is not a kilt either by your standards. It's a skirt. A real kilt would be a great square of some sort of plaid that you rolled your self up in and tied with a belt. That is the only true kilt there is if you do not allow evolution.

Who cares, all that matters is that you stop wearing troosers. They are uncomfortable.

**bubba** · 17th July 05, 01:25 PM

Scotus, I think it is an evolution. Lokk at it this way, a chihuahua isn't a Great Dane, but both are dogs nonetheless.

**Scotus** · 17th July 05, 01:35 PM

I agree about the evolution part. The great kilt evolved into what we have today and call a "traditional kilt." It may change slightly in the future, but I'm just saying that some people don't believe the Utilikilt is a kilt at all; therefore, not a true evolution of the same garment. The dog analogy doesn't necessarily hold; for example, you can say that a Utilikilt is a garment without leggings, and a kilt is a garment without leggings. It doesn't follow that a Utilikilt is, therefore, a kilt.

**KMacT** · 17th July 05, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Scotus

I agree about the evolution part. The great kilt evolved into what we have today and call a "traditional kilt." It may change slightly in the future, but I'm just saying that some people don't believe the Utilikilt is a kilt at all; therefore, not a true evolution of the same garment. The dog analogy doesn't necessarily hold.

A Utilikilt has a lot more in common with a "traditional" kilt than the "traditional" kilt has with the great kilt. But I agree that the dog analogy doesn't work.

Kevin

**LordDamax** · 17th July 05, 05:21 PM

I've read this thread and am trying to figure out how anyone can say a Utilikilt isnt a kilt? The major differences are, as I see it, cotton twill as opposed to wool, no built in buckles and straps (I had read here elsewhere that to be a true kilt it should have 3 straps and buckles), it has pockets, and snaps that are more for show than anything else, so those I lump in with the 'accessory' category, although you cannot remove them.

It's a pleated skirt-like garmen designed to be worn by men.

It's not a kilt because it's not wool? Because it has pockets? I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just trying to understand how people could say its not a kilt.

Remove the leather straps, add pockets and snaps, and my SWK wool black watch tartan looks like a plaid utilikilt.

I've never heard someone say "Hey those short two legged pant-like-things you are wearing with those cargo pockets arent pants!" because it's made from a different fabric and has cargo pockets. Why do the same for a kilt?

Is it a traditional kilt? No. Is it a kilt? Yes. Make a pair of jeans from a cotton/rayon blend and they arent really jeans anymore. Jeans are made from denim. Are they still pants? Of course.

**Dreadbelly** · 17th July 05, 05:23 PM

People complain about the UKs because not all of the pleats go to the left or something like that. Half of the pleats from behind go to the right while the other half go to the left. I think. Or something like that. That, and the thin curly apron. People think it looks to much like a skirt.

I dunno.

**LordDamax** · 17th July 05, 05:55 PM

Thin as in narrow width? I think it looks pretty good. My SWK I just got has an apron that personally, is entirely too wide. Personal preference doesnt dictate what is and isnt a kilt.

**gmcdavid** · 17th July 05, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by Dreadbelly

People complain about the UKs because not all of the pleats go to the left or something like that. Half of the pleats from behind go to the right while the other half go to the left. I think. Or something like that. That, and the thin curly apron. People think it looks to much like a skirt.

I dunno.

Like the Kingussie kilt?
http://www.cuillinn.com/repro.html

The problem with saying "X is not a kilt because of feature Y" is that for many values of Y, an unquestionably traditional kilt exists that has Y.

Hence I am reluctant to draw a line in the sand. It is likely to be unjustified, and certain to be uncharitable. In any case, it is utterly pointless. The Utilikilt is not my choice, but nobody is forcing it on me. Live and let live.

Glenn