What is the future of the Kilt?

[Chef]

Well I think the answer is quite obvious. If you deny that a garment is a kilt, which we all agree is a garment designed for, and traditionally worn by, men, then what is the alternative? In Western society I think we all know the answer.

Your statement that you'll defend some ones right to wear any garment they please rings hollow, if at the same time you effectively label said person a cross-dresser because their "kilt" doesn't meet your subjective criteria for what is a kilt.

Actually I think you are reading into what I was saying. I certainly agree on your definition of a kilt, I personally however do not believe that all unbifurcated garments designed for men and worn by men are kilts. That however is not the same as calling someone a cross-dresser, whom I would define as a man dressing up as a woman. While I don't think some of the new garments being called kilts are, I don't think that means the wearer is a cross-dresser. So again it may not be my idea of a kilt, but I will defend their right to wear it. I also defend the right of someone to be a cross-dresser, I think it's odd, but they have the right.

For better or worse, my big mouth is in gear and ready to sound off on this topic. It would seem that all this cafuffle began with the Tripp kilt. The original thread was posted by a member who wanted to share with us his son's first purchase. This young lad has started down the road to kilt wearing and being young, he chose something that was appropriate for his age. As is true in many cases, his tastes and choices will undoubtly become more refined as he grows. All I can say is lighten up, support the boy and move on.

Which is why I started the thread rather than post in that thread. I agree we should support him, and this thread wasn't meant to do otherwise. It was however reading that thread that got the debate started in my head and therefore gave me the idea to start this thread.