Interesting letter

**JSFMACLJR** · 12th June 09, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by Nighthawk

And besides, the extra length helps to preserve modesty when there's a nice wind blowing.

You must walk around in hurricanes! I've really never had a "modesty issue" when wearing the kilt in wind.

**Phil** · 12th June 09, 02:45 PM

Great to see you back and posting again, Jock. I know this is a bit of a personal thing (depending on your tailor) but my choice would be top of the knee-cap with a bit of leg showing between kilt and hose-top. Anything else just looks naff (sorry for the expletive but I hope your delicate state can stand it).

**Nighthawk** · 13th June 09, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by JSFMACLJR

You must walk around in hurricanes! I've really never had a "modesty issue" when wearing the kilt in wind.

In Colorado, we get some pretty nasty wind storms- especially in the spring. I left my sunroof open a couple days ago when we had a storm blow through. I had to go cover it with a tarp because of the huge chunks of ice falling from the sky- they had clogged the tracks by the time I got outside. The mountains produce their own special weather patterns. It can get rather blustery here at times. But I do have to say that my 16 oz kilts handle wind a lot better than my lighter weight ones. I prefer the lighter weigh, though, because when it's windy and hailing here, it's blisteringly hot! Or snowing... So the light weight is great for the heat and wind, the heavy is great for the cold and wind... Wow, we have a lot of wind here... I never really gave that much thought! Yeah, I think I'll stick with my mid knee kilts.

**beloitpiper** · 17th October 07, 08:58 AM

I've seen a lot of people wearing kilts low, and they accuse me of wearing too high! Keep in mind, according Mr. Edmond, my kilts are too short (they go to the top of my knee).

**Tattoo Bradley** · 17th October 07, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by beloitpiper

I've seen a lot of people wearing kilts low, and they accuse me of wearing too high! Keep in mind, according Mr. Edmond, my kilts are too short (they go to the top of my knee).

Actually, by Mr. Edmond's statements, he would consider your kilts too long. He states they should be 1 - 1.5" ABOVE the knee cap. Your's coming to the top of the knee would be longer.

**beloitpiper** · 18th October 07, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by Tattoobradley

Actually, by Mr. Edmond's statements, he would consider your kilts too long. He states they should be 1 - 1.5" ABOVE the knee cap. Your's coming to the top of the knee would be longer.

Whoops! You're right! That's what I meant.

**Hamish** · 17th October 07, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Jock Scot

.................................................. .....
One only needs to look, however, at today's wedding photographs to see how trollopy some kilt-wearers look with kilt and stockings almost meeting each other.
.................................................. ........................................

Why did he stop at wedding photographs, I wonder? It certainly applies at other times too, and is one of my pet peeves. "Trollopy" is the perfect word to describe how dreadful long kilts look.

**Frank McGrath** · 17th October 07, 07:39 PM

I wear mine too long, only because i bought it sight unseen without a fitting. My new Rocky-made will be has been measured to fit. Being built for comfort and not for speed has been a drawback my whole life.

**davidlpope** · 17th October 07, 07:54 PM

Nothing scientific to back up my point, but I think the real problem is not that the kilts themselves are too long, but that men wear the top of the kilt too low on their body. It seems to me that mens' clothing, including pants, used to be worn much higher at the natural waist, instead of the hips. Compare the length of kilts from the MOD to most stock kilts. The stock kilts are usually 24", the MOD kilts seemed to be around 26"-27". Still, modern photos of kilted men show the kilt riding lower, even though the rise is less. Also, since many kilts are not properly fitted to the small of the back/rump area, they tend to creep down when one is wearing them, resulting in the "trollopy" look.

Cordially,
David

**Carolina Kiltman** · 12th June 09, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by davidlpope

Nothing scientific to back up my point, but I think the real problem is not that the kilts themselves are too long, but that men wear the top of the kilt too low on their body. It seems to me that mens' clothing, including pants, used to be worn much higher at the natural waist, instead of the hips. Compare the length of kilts from the MOD to most stock kilts. The stock kilts are usually 24", the MOD kilts seemed to be around 26"-27". Still, modern photos of kilted men show the kilt riding lower, even though the rise is less. Also, since many kilts are not properly fitted to the small of the back/rump area, they tend to creep down when one is wearing them, resulting in the "trollopy" look.

Cordially,
David

You are absolutely correct about trousers being worn lower than before. I used to have to have custom made clothing because of my proportions (I am 6'-5", 196 cm tall, and weighed only about 70kg or 153 lbs at the time. The tailor always measured me around my true waist and that is where the waist of the trousers went.

I rather think it was about 40 years or so ago that trousers started to be cut with far less rise (to cut fabric costs?) perhaps because it is easier to wear them under the "pot".

Scotty Thompson in his book So You Are Going to Wear the kilt also advocated the kilt being no lower than the top of the knee-cap, and called the longer look "trollopy"

Another factor could be that braces (suspenders) became far less commonly worn about the time immediately after WWII, in much the same way the pocket watch was supplanted by the wrist watch after WWI

Also if you are a "gentleman of substance" as my mother used to say, trousers with the belt at the waist are more difficult to keep up, unless the trousers are custom made. This is not a problem with braces.