Another protectionist kilt article from "The Scotsman"

[Bugbear]

... how does the geographical location of the birth of a thing fundamentally alter it's basic nature? I'm trying really hard to understand... but I just don't get it!

Because, Nighthawk, we don't live out there in the real world, we live in the world being created by our perceptions. Our perceptions are, in part, handed to us by our culture and families, etc. If we grow up thinking a kilt made in the U.S. is not a kilt, then in the world inside our heads, it is not perceived as a kilt.

You all can laugh at me all you want, but I have a ton of psychology books that discuss, except for the kilt, exactly that.

As to what the real world is... They haven't figured it out yet: QED or Strings.

[McClef]

I totally agree with Jock about the labelling issue - the retailers of the "tartan tat" end should be forced to stop using the misleading "authentic highland tartan designed in Scotland" labels and to declare origin and material composition upon them instead.

But Mr Hawthorne does not appear to be asking for this - he is seeking to define what is a Scottish kilt which is a very different issue.

I have long argued that a labelling standard would go a long way to solving many of the perceived problems without creating new ones.