A call to regulate the term "kilt"

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I don't think you understood me, Gilmore. I don't have a problem with people saying that only onions from Vidalia can be called "Vidalia Onions."

I would, however, have a problem with someone attempting to claim that only onions from Vidalia are, in fact, true onions.

Same thing with kilts. A machine-sewn acrylic Pakistani made kilt sold for $40 is still a kilt. It's just a much lower quality kilt.

We don't need to come up with a restrictive definition of "kilt." We just need to have some truth in advertising so that people are not being misled.

[macwilkin]

We don't need to come up with a restrictive definition of "kilt." We just need to have some truth in advertising so that people are not being misled.

I think Matt has summed it up quite nicely.

While I certainly do not agree with the proposed legislation in this story, I, as a self-proclaimed "bluff old traditionalist", can respect the sentiment behind it.

Regards,

Todd

[pdcorlis]

Game, set, and match to Mr. Newsome I believe... Well said Matt.

[ardchoille]

We just need to have some truth in advertising so that people are not being misled.

Well said Mr. Newsome.

On the other hand, what is the definition of "jeans"? Is any garment which is made of denim (denim skirts?) also called jeans? Are jeans only made of denim?

[ccga3359]

Well said Mr. Newsome.

On the other hand, what is the definition of "jeans"? Is any garment which is made of denim (denim skirts?) also called jeans? Are jeans only made of denim?

Jeans are generally made from denim. One could have a jean skirt the same as one could have a kilted skirt. The former are not jeans, the latter not a kilt. A kilt made of denim is not jeans and according to the article would not be a kilt. Could we call them keans or a jilt? Yes, but people would look at us strange. Can you tell that now I'm just gibbering?

[Arlen]

*Sighs*
Articles about Kilts and Tartan in the Scotsman frustrate me so much.
Here's what a kilt is: A M.U.G with a double apron, closing on the right hand side, pleated in the rear and ending at the level of the knee.
Yes, they were 'invented' in Scotland.
But I can't really see any of my ancestors laughing at someone in a denim kilt or a P.V. kilt.
I mean, if we're all going to talk about being thrifty Scots, would they not think it was a great idea to get a nice knockaround kilt and keep their expensive wool kilt clean so they didn't have to pay for dry-cleaning?

A kilt's a kilt regardless of where it's made or what with.
Just don't pretend it was made in Scotland if it wasn't and everything is just fine.

[Archangel]

This is actually a big issue in the world right now. I forget the acronym but there's an international moratorium right now on registering names ("intellectual property"). It's there to give places like Champagne a chance to register their product. The bad guy in this is US law firms and companies waiting for someone to slip so they can register the product. (Sorry)

The losers here are not going to be the EEC producers but third world producers who don't have the legal defense to prevent it. Certain foods are already registered by US firms and the traditional farmers have lost control of their own trade. It's a form of Bio-Piracy

It's why emotions run so high at WTO and G8(?) events.

And we're probably about to get too political for this forum. Just google everything I've said.

[gilmore]

I don't think you understood me, Gilmore. I don't have a problem with people saying that only onions from Vidalia can be called "Vidalia Onions."

I would, however, have a problem with someone attempting to claim that only onions from Vidalia are, in fact, true onions.

Same thing with kilts. A machine-sewn acrylic Pakistani made kilt sold for $40 is still a kilt. It's just a much lower quality kilt.

We don't need to come up with a restrictive definition of "kilt." We just need to have some truth in advertising so that people are not being misled.

I understand you perfectly.

Admittedly, the Vidalia onion example wasn't as on point as others.

But I don't think you understand me. Words have legal meanings. It's not a matter of "When I say 'kilt,' I mean this, therefore this is what 'kilt' means," or "There are so many different kinds of kilts that the term can't possibly be defined."

There is a multivolume work called "Words and Phrases" put out by West Publishing company that takes up about 40 feet of shelves in most law libraries. It contains the legal definitions of hundreds of thousands of words dating back hundreds of years. Some of these words were defined by the courts. Some were defined by legislatures. Some were defined by administrative agencies. Regardless of how they came to be defined, that definition is controlling as a matter of law in the applicable jurisdictions. Some of these definitions are excrutiatingly precise and have been the subject of much litigation.

So, the parliament of Scotland or the United Kingdom or the EU could easily decide that only garments with X number of yards of wool, with knife pleats across the back and made in Scotland can be sold as "kilts" within Scotland, within the United Kingdom, or within the EU. It could also decide that similar garments with box pleats are legally defined as "less than virile man skirts" and cannot be sold as anything else. I don't know that that is the perfect solution, but there is no doubt that it could be accomplished simply.

As to what "we" need to do, those of us on the western side of the Atlantic may have opinions, but are not really part of the discussion. Of course overseas sales may be an issue, but how Scots resolve these problems will be done by Scots, other British, their trade associations, their parliaments, etc.

[Fedgunner]

Y'all hush!

I got me a bunch of kilts on order.
If this sillyness goes through, they will all be "pre-bans" and worth a fortune!

I got me a "pre-ban" toilet too!

(tounge planted firmly in cheek)

[Thomas]

Just my 2 cents on it- What makes a dress a national dress? It´s the people. Many of my friends (although living in Scotland) own so called drinking kilts made of less and man made fabric. Some of them don´t even own a traditional wool kilt because the average man simply can´t afford a tank.
I agree, that a tank is the real thing and it always will be- but you can´t ignore that the kilt has got another image,too. It´s worn casual more often. If you wipe out inexpensive casual kilts at an affordable price, I´m sure you will wipe out kilt wearing average men. Would be a pity, I think.