Kilt, Skirt, MUG, etc.

[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

[KiltedBishop]

Wow...made it to the end! Personally I think the english language is a mess, that is why it is so hard to learn. Our letter groupings sound different in different words, through, rough, bough, and the definitions change. Words have meanings now, that may be different tomorrow. pleat and tartan used to mean different things than they do now. I personally think the big problem with the word "skirt" is it's slang term for a woman/girl.

I am glad everyone enjoys their dictionary but I lost faith in it when I heard the word Nuculear was going in as "a mispronuciation of Nuclear". For me it's just a name, just a word. call it a skirt, a kilt, a love curtain, a penis tent, does it really matter? if the term skirt became accepted as non-sexual *** holes would start calling them dresses...and so on. It is interesting to hear peoples thoughts. I have had it called a skirt, even as a dig and I just say "thanks". The only bad reaction I had was when someone asked why I was wearing a girls dress, I said it was a kilt, or a man-skirt, and I wear because it's comfortable and I could only feel sorry for him that he and his equipment fit well into trousers, me and mine don't. He shut up

Cheers

[KiltedCodeWarrior]

J'Dez,

Glad to help! There is a lot of info on this board, and some very lively discussions. As Rigged pointed out, we have a broad mix of people participating with a broad range of goals/agendas/etc., and Hank and the rest of the Mods do a pretty good job of keeping things on track. I don't always agree with some of the censors, but I do enjoy this board more than most because it rarely degenerates into the sniping and personal attacks that pervade many boards.

KiltedBishop, good point on how difficult English is to learn, and how it keeps evolving. Before gay became synonymous with homosexuality, the original meaning was just happy or with a positive upbeat attitude. Never did understand how it could morph to refer to somebody who was homosexual. Was it that people thought homosexuals were happier than others? Why were heterosexuals referred to as "straight"?

So many questions, so few real answers.

[Kilts_Knave]

Never did understand how it could morph to refer to somebody who was homosexual. Was it that people thought homosexuals were happier than others?

No, I can help out here. Gertrude Stein first used the term in "The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas," which is also, by the way, where we get the recipe for her wonderful cookies!

[Kilts_Knave]

Oops, wrong story. This one: "Miss Furr & Mrs. Skeene." I was probably asleep in class at the time. The title above refers to Alice and Gertrude.

[Tiran]

Never did understand how it could morph to refer to somebody who was homosexual. Was it that people thought homosexuals were happier than others? Why were heterosexuals referred to as "straight"?

I have several books on lanuage, the origin of terms and the history of homosexuality and I have never come across an explanation that made sense for the use of the term gay. I could find only two reference in any of my books. The first is from the book that is the most questionalbe academically. It claims that gay is an evolution of the name Gaia, the greek term for the earth and the titan thereof. The only reasoning given is that the term Lesbian came from the isle of Lebos, in refernce to the poetess Sappho and her school that was located there. Questionable to say the least.
Another claims the term gay was used in the 16th cen. to refer to a promiscous woman, and gay men began using it for themselves in the 1920s, however it does not which of its sources this is from. More logical but still unsupported.
I will have to research the Gertrude Stein refernce.

Straight on the other hand came as the opposite of Bent, one of the better documented historical terms for gay that has fallen out of general use (as well as the title of a play about homosexuals set in Nazi Germany, starring Mick Jagger in the movie version).

There. Not that most of you care I am sure. :grin: Not that I care that you don't care lol :grin: Doesn't bother me in the least. :grin: But if other people can talk about guns, cars, wives and girlfriends, I can talk about language and being gay. :-D

[KiltedCodeWarrior]

Tiran,

Thanks for the follow-up. I am surprised that there is not more information between the word and the connection to homosexuals, and the reasoning behind it considering how recently it was popular. Of course, then again I am always that fag has the same connotation here in the states and in the UK is a cigarette, which makes sense because a ****** historically referred to a bundle of wood, usually burning. It still tickles me to here somebody from the UK ask somebody else for a fag!