Loincloth Uproar

[NewKilt]

Originally posted by Graham
I'll stick with the kilt, it's a perfect balance of tradition, freedom and decency.

Very well said, Graham. I had never thought about it, but indeed it does strike that balance. I have not had one negative comment from anyone in 5 months of full-time kilt wearing. Many compliments, and it has caused quite a few people to remember their heritage. I have been quite pleasantly surprised.

My aplogies for getting a bit off-topic here in the loin cloth acceptance thread. I'm certainly no loin cloth expert, but it gave me cause to wonder why this would be ruled as indecent exposure, unless the back were open. Of course, this is a different culture, and what is considered indecent exposure could be different than in a western culture.

[Graham]

I know as kilt wearers we are a bunch of lads who like to shun some social traditions and do our own thing. However, in any society there are rules, some are open to interpretation, others are enforced by law.

Even a kilt might be considered indecent if I wear it without underpants while Scottish Country dancing.

In some cultures the woman go topless, does that mean it's fine to go topless down the main street of our town? Well not here anyway.

I believe the golden rule is considering others and not going out of our way to cause offense.

[mddock58]

I think it goes to who we are as well.

Wether we are regemental or not while wearing the kilt is not just a reflection of our own confidence/ability to wear it, but we need to consider who we are, where we are, and the effects/respone around us.

This is not saying that it is obsene to go regemental, but wearing it in that manner can cause some to have problems, yes, it's their problem, but it can be your problem as well.

Because of who I am, I do not go out regemental, this is my choice, because I determine it is not something that is that important, and I don't need to cause problems. This is currently why I have not worn my kilt to a church service as yet. They do see me in the kilt in other situations, and it will be worn to a service eventually, but it is not necessary to push it.

These guys in loincloths were protesting, they were out for the shock factor. Just as political protestors walk NYC streets in the buff, they wanted the press. They also knew what the response would most likely be.

As we have discussed before, the motivation behind wearing the garment should be considered, as well as what was being worn (or what was not!).
Just as the students in NJ were protesting - trying to make a point - it is less an issue of wearing a MUG, and more the intent of the protest.

I agree with their protest, and think that they could have gone about it differently, but the negetive information that was passed through the press reflected on MUG wearers.

The loincloth wearers got what they probably expected. They got the press they wanted. Hopefully the "exposure" receives a positive end result.

[cavscout]

From another article:
http://www.zwnews.com/issuefull.cfm?ArticleID=13671

"the two were seen at Pendennis Shopping Centre wearing goatskins covering their private parts with their behinds exposed."

And another:

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx...ticleid=262611

"walking around in goatskin loincloths while claiming to be divine messengers preaching about creation."

I think the real story is becoming more clear. These guys may have some mental problems. Considering their buttocks were exposed, there are also some hygiene issues in a modern society.

I think Graham's standard of being considerate of others is the key here. No matter what the cultural context, curtousy and common sense should rule the day.

[GlassMan]

The full story does begin to clarify things. Sounds like the guys skipped off their medication.

[646guy]

From another article:
http://www.zwnews.com/issuefull.cfm?ArticleID=13671

"the two were seen at Pendennis Shopping Centre wearing goatskins covering their private parts with their behinds exposed."

Hmmm sounds like a normal ride on the subway to me...

And another:

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx...ticleid=262611

"walking around in goatskin loincloths while claiming to be divine messengers preaching about creation."

Well if this was the 1/9 line it would definitely make sense...or the N/R... :razz:

[filman]

ok i have been to Masvingro with a buddy of mine from the Corps back in 89, he was born and lived there till he was 16 then came to America.. Anyway we went to see his family and I do recall seeing lioncloths of cotten not goat skin. they coverd the grion area but had no backs, some had rap of cloth on. and yes i did see suits as well as jeans and dresses. but if i recall it was all normel wear.

in the city i have seen young men with asses hanging out of jeens, but the grion is covered do we arest them for that?

and like a few of you have said i have seen less on the beach in Fl. and the malls there as well.

It was stated that this is how their god dressed them. I have herd this statment many times by many differnt peoples.. do we put all them in jail as too?

I am not saying i would go out in a loincloth, but i do not think i would were the robes of the Arabian lands eather.

if it covers the privet parts ,, then i think that it is their choise to were what they want. But who am i to say what is decent or not.