Another Question

**McClef** · 27th March 10, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by MacMillan of Rathdown

Trefor, simply because a statement may be dogmatic doesn't make it any the less true.

Depends how you define "true" doesn't it. What may be true in your eyes may still be a non sequitur in the eyes of others.

Originally Posted by MacMillan of Rathdown

Trefor, a gentleman doesn't have to prove anything. He is a gentleman because he constantly strives to do "the right thing" in every facet of his daily life. He may not always succeed, but he always tries to get it right.

I've yet to meet a gentleman who would disagree with either of the above statements.

(And my apologies for my stuttering keyboard

)

I will forgive the keyboard.

Naturally a gentleman may strive to do the right thing. The issue is that gentlemen do, and often have, disagreed about what the "right thing" is.

But I am sure that one gentleman speculating about another gentleman's genitalia is not one of them.

**MacMillan of Rathdown** · 27th March 10, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by McClef

Depends how you define "true" doesn't it. What may be true in your eyes may still be a non sequitur in the eyes of others.

Sadly, this is all too accurate. What gentlemen agree to be true-- for example, never unintentionally giving offense-- is quite often totally lost on those I might charitably characterize as "the round haircuts" who usually make no effort whatsoever to behave like gentlemen regardless of time or place.

**Redshank** · 27th March 10, 02:06 PM

Gentlemen, this could drag on for days, may I suggest a solution ......

Pistols at dawn ?

**McClef** · 27th March 10, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by MacMillan of Rathdown

Sadly, this is all too accurate. What gentlemen agree to be true-- for example, never unintentionally giving offense-- is quite often totally lost on those I might charitably characterize as "the round haircuts" who usually make no effort whatsoever to behave like gentlemen regardless of time or place.

Sir you are Cavalier!

But I will be damned if I (and no doubt will many others) consider myself (or themselves) any less a gentleman for choosing not to over err on the side of caution when it is not justified.

There is another quote defining a gentleman that I neglected to mention in my previous post.

A gentleman is someone who knows how to play the bagpipes - but doesn't. That's funny but would offend some if it was said seriously in some quarters!

Originally Posted by Redshank

Gentlemen, this could drag on for days, may I suggest a solution ......

Pistols at dawn ?

I think we would settle it over a beer actually!

**ABG0819** · 27th March 10, 04:45 PM

Gentlemen please....I believe the OP's question was about going regimental in public not the definition of a gentleman. I would like to submit that we are all gentlemen here, and trust me I work around the most un-gentlemanly people you could ever imagine.

On to the question of the OP. I have a desire to wear my kilt regimental and probably would most of the time except for one little thing. My soon-to-be-wife, who by the way has be very supportive of my new kilting lifestyle, has asked me not to. Therefore when I wear my kilt out in public 2-4 days a week I wear undergarments. It is not a lack of respect for my heritage, or the traditions of kilt wearing. It is simply a small sign of respect for my beloved.

For those of you who wear kilts regimental...congratulations. For those of you who don't...congratulations. Wearing a kilt is one way of showing your pride in your heritage, and in many people's eyes it is an extreme measure. I personally do not care what is underneath you kilts and those who do need to be issued a life for some government agency or another. I believe it was William J. Clinton who said "Don't ask, don't tell." Perhaps it is a motto we, The Kilted Rabble, should adopt forthwith.

Thank you for your time,

Graham

**BroosterB1** · 27th March 10, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by ABG0819

Gentlemen please....I believe the OP's question was about going regimental in public not the definition of a gentleman. I would like to submit that we are all gentlemen here, and trust me I work around the most un-gentlemanly people you could ever imagine.

On to the question of the OP. I have a desire to wear my kilt regimental and probably would most of the time except for one little thing. My soon-to-be-wife, who by the way has be very supportive of my new kilting lifestyle, has asked me not to. Therefore when I wear my kilt out in public 2-4 days a week I wear undergarments. It is not a lack of respect for my heritage, or the traditions of kilt wearing. It is simply a small sign of respect for my beloved.

For those of you who wear kilts regimental...congratulations. For those of you who don't...congratulations. Wearing a kilt is one way of showing your pride in your heritage, and in many people's eyes it is an extreme measure. I personally do not care what is underneath you kilts and those who do need to be issued a life for some government agency or another. I believe it was William J. Clinton who said "Don't ask, don't tell." Perhaps it is a motto we, The Kilted Rabble, should adopt forthwith.

Thank you for your time,

Graham

I very much agree, the question of being regimental or not, is one of choice and respect. It is my choice, but I respect my wife's wishes and wear wee trews in her company.

For me it really boils down to I feel I will be most comfortable; if I am going to on my feet most of the time then regitmental is not a problem, indeed may be preferred. However if I am going to be seated quite a bit, regitmental may not be the preferred way to go.

Just because there is an expectation of being regimental to others, there is absolutly no reason you should do anything other than what makes you comfortable.

Cheers

ith:

**MacMillan of Rathdown** · 27th March 10, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by McClef

Sir you are Cavalier!

But I will be damned if I (and no doubt will many others) consider myself (or themselves) any less a gentleman for choosing not to over err on the side of caution when it is not justified.

There is another quote defining a gentleman that I neglected to mention in my previous post.

A gentleman is someone who knows how to play the bagpipes - but doesn't. That's funny but would offend some if it was said seriously in some quarters!

I think we would settle it over a beer actually!

Absolutely! And the first round is on that chap over there who doesn't understand that gentlemen respect each other all the more after a spirited discussion.

**Rob Wright** · 27th March 10, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by MacMillan of Rathdown

Absolutely! And the first round is on that chap over there who doesn't understand that gentlemen respect each other all the more after a spirited discussion.

First round on The Scotsman then

Rob

**Redshank** · 28th March 10, 02:11 AM

Originally Posted by MacMillan of Rathdown

Absolutely! And the first round is on that chap over there who doesn't understand that gentlemen respect each other all the more after a spirited discussion.

You 2 can keep me amused for hours with your gentlemanly banter, it would be my pleasure to buy you both the first round.

**Jordan** · 11th April 10, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by Redshank

You 2 can keep me amused for hours with your gentlemanly banter, it would be my pleasure to buy you both the first round.

I agree completely and would offer the second round on me if such a situation were to occur.

Back on topic I started kilt wearing firmly in the Dude wears kilt= regimental/true Scotsman etc
however when I went down to Edinburgh to visit TFCK I got chatting to Howie who pointed out that not being regimental (with "Wee trews" or whatever you want to call them) saves having to clean your kilts so much more for the wool tanks not the lighter weight ones that can go in the washing machine UK's SWK's etc. So I’m at a cross roads just now not sure what to decide either way.

Just my tuppence make what you will of this.

Jordan