Kilt, Skirt, MUG, etc.

[Freedomlover]

Freedomlover,

Sure "always" was a reckless word to use. I admit it. But within our little mountain out of a mole hill, your taking far, far too much advantage from that small error. Please note that the word "always" was not used in at least the last two postings that contained my question.

I hope you don't think I'm picking on the little things. There is a very good reason why I went that way. Language should be used with care lest the speaker convey something he didn't intend, and put the hearer in the position of having to interpret what the speaker may have actually meant. Please understand that everyone gets a little reckless with language now and then (well, maybe William Safire doesn't), but in a discussion of this type precision is crucial.

Just answer the question: WHERE DO YOU THINK THE DEFINITION OF WORDS COME FROM? Would it help if we rephrase: where do you think the definitions of common English words come from? How about: Generally, The fact that you call my statement that the meaning of English words comes from a cultural consensus a "quagmire of social relativism" makes me very where do you think the definitions of common English words come from?

I will surprise you. I think the definition of common English words comes from a consensus opinion. We agree on what a word means, then that is how we use it. But that does not convey any individual right to re-define any given word because of personal notions. Word usages obviously do change over time, but that change is usually gradual, taking generations to evolve. There are exceptions, of course.

My remark about "social relativism", was rooted in your insistance that "skirt" is exclusively female, and therefore you reject out of hand the currently accepted dictionary definition that a kilt is a man's skirt. You cited your desk OED which said "skirtlike" as your reason for rejection. But have you considered what the suffix "like" means? Here it is: "possessing the characteristics of; resembling closely; similar to". You have made a distinction without a difference.

My only purpose has been, from the beginning, to address a matter of fact. I do not refer to my kilts as skirts (even though they are), nor do I expect anyone else to. Recognition of plain facts is all I'm after.

Can I ask a Moderator to direct that the member answer the question? LOL

I'm sure you can, but you will find out that no one here is under any compulsion to reply to a post. Participation is voluntary.

[Dreadbelly]

May I be excused? I believe my brain is full. *Urp*

Seriously. All these posts, and nothing is actually being said.

Except for the blouse bit. A Jacobite shirt, by definition of design, is actually a blouse. And it's a male garment.

And what about hose? You say that, and people think, women's hosery. Panty hose. FEMININE! And yet... We skirt wearing men also wear blouses and hose...

Sorry. This thread stopped being productive a long time ago. I was just manning the bellows to get some flames going.

[KiltedCodeWarrior]

May I be excused? I believe my brain is full. *Urp*

Seriously. All these posts, and nothing is actually being said.

Except for the blouse bit. A Jacobite shirt, by definition of design, is actually a blouse. And it's a male garment.

And what about hose? You say that, and people think, women's hosery. Panty hose. FEMININE! And yet... We skirt wearing men also wear blouses and hose...

Sorry. This thread stopped being productive a long time ago. I was just manning the bellows to get some flames going.

Dread, I think that is the only reason to read this thread anymore, and I started it! I admit my goal was to drive some lively debate, but between more than 2 participants sniping at each other and the rest of us going wondering what the big deal was. The only reason I see to continue this thread now is to break the number of posts and reviews! I thought I saw on a thread that the longest on Xmarks was 168, we have to be getting close at this point.

[Rigged]

The "big deal" is one of public perception. Particularly when the public is one's employer or spouse.

[Sherry]

But, since you can't control people's actual thoughts, isn't the best thing to do about public perception is to wear your kilt(s) often & be a supreme gentleman while you are out?

I am, unfortunately, the type of person who worries too much about what others think (though I have improved much in this area over the years). My 20yo son, OTOH, doesn't worry about it at all. While he doesn't give a flip what others think, he is a gentleman, & does (I think in fact) influence others' thinking about the kilt in a positive way.

Sherry

[KiltedCodeWarrior]

...doesn't give a flip what others think, he is a gentleman, & does (I think in fact) influence others' thinking about the kilt in a positive way...

Sherry, this is what I aspire too.

It also looks like I might also have hijacked my own thread back! Either that or Freedomlover and jkdesq are off for the weekend. Anyway, if anyone has been following the Underkilt thread, feel free to leverage that to point your views here. I already pointed Jdez to this thread to educate him.

RJI

[Rigged]

But, since you can't control people's actual thoughts,

Actually, marketing and political propogandists do a pretty good job of controlling people's thoughts. It's all about a careful choice of words and using them consistently.

They do it so well that people just rattle off words and phrases without even thinking about where they came from. I used, "A woman's right to choose." as an example in a previous post. The word, "homosexual" had a negative connotation so "gay" is now commonly used. Times have changed and among teenagers, "gay" now has a negative connotation (meaning "stupid" or "banal").

While it's easy for some people to walk around with their chest puffed out proclaiming that they don't care what anyone else thinks, there are some people who can totally screw up your life (bosses, spouses -- especially if you have young children, cops).

I've also said elsewhere that there are several agendas at work on this board.

Some guys are strict traditionalists, some are closet cross-dressers, others are unisex gender-neutralists. We've got feminists, masculinists, marketeers, and people who just like to push buttons. We also have guys that just want the freedom to wear the kilts of our choice whenever and wherever we choose.

Some of the traditional kiltmakers and kilt wearers are having fits over the modern kilts. If it weren't for the moderns, kilt-wearing would still be a once-a-year or once-in-a-lifetime event for most guys -- like wearing a tuxedo.

Now, there are kilts that can be worn in more casual situations. I can't imagine why anyone would object to that.

I'm not going to wear a neatly pressed, nicely tailored, hand-sewn kilt with kilt pin and sporran to help a friend move heavy furniture. I have an ugly, faded, stained workman's Utilikilt for stuff like that.

I state my agenda up front: What gets more guys into kilts is good -- what doesn't get more guys into kilts is bad.

[JDEZ]

Sherry, this is what I aspire too.

It also looks like I might also have hijacked my own thread back! Either that or Freedomlover and jkdesq are off for the weekend. Anyway, if anyone has been following the Underkilt thread, feel free to leverage that to point your views here. I already pointed Jdez to this thread to educate him.

RJI

Great educational thread. I am new to the group as of yesterday. This subject touches on a topic of interest to me since my company manufactures (among other things) skirt-like garments for men (http://www.jdez.com/men). During our initial test marketing, many of our customers referred to our products as "kilts". We noticed right away that a lot of men were sensitive to the word "skirt". Our most popular items, (we now call "Kilt-Shorts"), has drawn criticism from the kilt community. These styles are different in that they are designed to convert into decent looking shorts.- But they really are not kilts. I have only recently learned about the controversy surrounding the subject of "kilts" vs. "skirts". I had a thought that might help reduce market confusion, which I mentioned on another thread (http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/s...6&page=4&pp=10):

...Maybe the term "Mock-Kilt" could be used to define non-kilt men's garments that have a somewhat similar silhouette as a kilt? That would mean that anything that does not conform to the traditional configuration of a Kilt, but looks kind of like a kilt from a distance could be called a "Mock-Kilt". Maybe such a term as this (or similar) could be used to satisfy the needs of manufacturers making alternative men's skirt products without encroaching too much on Scottish heritage. I do agree that the image and definition of a kilt should remain what it is. Manufacturers just can't broadly sell something called a men's skirt in today's market. - Just looking for a solution to what looks to be an old problem. - I appreciate everyone's input on this issue, as I am new to the men's apparel industry.

Thanks RJI for pointing out this thread.

-- Dave

[jkdesq]

One step forward and two steps back. Quit being evasive.

I have never said that I could redefine the word "kilt" or "skirt". My understanding that a "skirt" is a woman's garment comes from several source, which include: i) my OED that defines a skirt as "a woman's outergarment hanging from the waist" combined with the definition of kilt as "skirtlike" and not a "skirt"; ii) my understanding (as a nearly bilingual anglophone Canadian, who has an undergraduate and post-graduate degree and has traveled extensively through Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and East Asia) that when a typical English speaker says "skirt" they mean a garment intended for woman. The fact that when an English speaker calls a man's kilt a "skirt" they usually mean to tease or offend, I would say is a point in support of my opinion.

My point all along has been that there is ambiguity in the meaning of English words. There is no way to avoid ambiguity in a "culture consensus". Why do you think the first 1/4 of any legal document is definitions? Unless you are going to conduct a pole of all English speakers and come up with a system of quorum for the number of speakers it takes to lay the foundation of a definition, there is no absolute answer to what a word means. The OED and Websters (and fine, the bargain basement Compact OED weighs in on the Webster's side) disagree so dictionaries aren't the final answer. Are you suggesting that you are the sole English Immortal and can definitively tell me what "skirt" and "kilt" mean?

We are left with ambiguity. From there, individuals can take opinions. Everyone knows mine and yours. Neither are correct, neither are incorrect.

I've been offering a draw for awhile. It is you who keeps looking for the knock out punch and calling my point of view incorrect and "irrational". Can we agree to disagree and to respect each others opinions as rational and reasonable?

[Freedomlover]

Well, I give up. You aren't the only one with both undergraduate and graduate degrees, but possession of formal education does not guarantee perspicacity. Rigged, in the post just above, has it right. I had hoped for the recognition of an excruciatingly simple fact, but my hope was in vain. So yes, we can call it a draw.