Kilts on "The View"

[AtagahiKC]

Just for the record, I was vaguely watching the discussion on the View that day while working on a project.

I believe that two of the ladies dismissed the discussion of kilts with transgenderism as off-topic. I want to say it was Joy and Barbara, but I honestly don't remember for sure, now.

The two of them didn't feel that a man wearing a kilt was anything like a young child experimenting with the other gender's clothing. In any case, kilts were brought up and dismissed within a very small portion of the discussion.

I think Barbara was well-intentioned in her view that a pre-school teacher should tell the parents if their son put on dresses in the costume corner. She brought transgenderism into a child development topic in error, in my opinion.

She referred to a story about transgenderism that she or someone had done. The story discussed how transgendered people knew early in their lives that they were the wrong sex on the outside. She felt that the parents would want to know so they could help their child deal with it and be psychologically healthy as they grew up.

The problem is that in developmental psychology, one learns that pre-school and kindergarten is the age that children are fluid in their gender roles and often try out clothing of the other gender. It isn't that unusual. Children usually socialize to society's gender role expectations through social cues from other children or their parents' over-reaction or discomfort with the matter..

Since that is the case, I think Barbara was wrong as informing the parents would raise more "false positives" and create more problems than it would help, as many of the children would end up developing into their expected gender roles without interference by parents. There will probably be other clues if the child is transgender beyond that developmental stage anyway.

To sum her position up, Barbara was arguing for greater compassion for children's differences.

However, as Sherri so amply displayed, compassion for a child's differences often flies out the window when it is your own child, especially if one is ignorant on the topic or doesn't have an open mind.

Still, I understand her reaction. I think many, if not most, parents react the same way when confronted by nonconforming gender behavior in their children. Most of the bad reactions, in my opinion, comes from confusing gender behavior with sexual orientation. That seemed to at least part of the cause of Sherri's reaction.

Hopefully that reaction is changing. How many sitcoms episodes have there been about fathers thinking that their sons were gay because of nonconforming gender behavior and futilely trying to "butch" them up to make them straight?

(My favorite is when Homer Simpson took Bart to a steel mill, hoping that the masculine influence would make him straight. The mill's hyper-masculine workforce turned out to be gay. The steel mill turned into a disco at night, replete with mirror ball, to Homer's great surprise. "Everybody dance now!" It turns his theory of gender behavior and homosexuality on end. D'oh!)

I don't often defend The View. But in this case, I think we shouldn't criticize the entire panel for Sherri's ignorance. I think that it was a case of mixing in too many unrelated issues into a child development topic. Further complicating the matter was that none of the panel had enough useful information to make it a worthwhile discussion.

Instead, it yielded a confused and reactionary response among the panel. They didn't know how to get out of the hole they dug themselves once they realized they were in it.

That said, I do seem to remember Sherri equating a kilt with a skirt, which is what raised the ire of everyone here, including the lady who wrote the linked response. Sherri deserves all the scorn she is receiving for that misinformed view.

[Rigged]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehWv_qlKxSg

OK?

[emolas]

Btw, I'm officially calling a moratorium on people invoking Scottish kilts during a discussion on transgenderism. First of all, it's truly not relevant. Kilts aren't "skirts." They are gender-specific, and they are menswear. To use them as example of men who dress "like women" is a misrepresentation, and it just confuses the argument about what being transgender really is. It's approximately like suggesting that a woman who wears a woman's business suit is cross-dressing.

I would like to defend the OP here...
I think her "dismissal" of kilts as irrelevant in a discussion of cross-dressing is a good thing. Unlike many people who think that men who wear kilts do so to satisfy a hidden desire to dress like a woman, the author is stating clearly that kilts are for men and in no way related to women's clothes. Even her second statement, though poorly worded, is more or less true. The majority of Scottish men DON'T run around in kilts daily anymore and only wear them for special occasions (enlightened members of XMTS notwithstanding). I also saw the electricity comment as sarcasm related to the fact that it's been a long time since kilts were everyday attire. I couldn't force myself to watch the entire clip of The View (I had to stop when I felt the testosterone rapidly draining from my body) so I am only going off of the blog post but I'm sure that bunch of old hens didn't have anything good to say about it.

My family is Scottish, I have lived in Scotland, and I am married to a Scottish immigrant.

Best,
Melissa McEwan

I love this "I'm not racist, some of my best friends are black..." statement.

[Makeitstop]

I just find this whole thing to be absolutely shocking... people actually watch the view?

[AtagahiKC]

Believe it or not, it makes for good background noise while I'm working on other things and occasionally I listen and get my blood pressure up in lieu of actual exercise. But now that I have my stereo hooked up, I'll probably start playing music instead.

[DamnthePants]

I just find this whole thing to be absolutely shocking... people actually watch the view?

I admit, I watch it. Its the only thing on between when I wake up, and when I need to get to work.

To me, its the joy of watching 4 people whos opinion dont matter, despretly try to make you think they do. At the end you can laugh at how they are meaningless.

I actualy saw this segment. I perked up when they used Kilts to defend how men can wear skirts. Cant blame them, when you think of Non-pants for men, you think kilts. Though historicaly I am sure you could find oodles of older garments. Rome comes to mind, Togas and what not ( though they also went nude alot)


What annoyed me about this article was how.. it was just wrong in my opinion. The "They wear pants now, they only wear kilts on special occasions, but its mainly pants all the time" comment seemed so wrong.

If I had enough Kilts, so that I could varry it up day to day ( and didnt work in a dump that would destory them) I would ditch my pants all together.

[Clockwork John]

What annoyed me about this article was how.. it was just wrong in my opinion. The "They wear pants now, they only wear kilts on special occasions, but its mainly pants all the time" comment seemed so wrong.

I get so tired of this perspective, and not just about kilts. It's that old, tired, "that's not how we (society) do it. You need to do it our way instead."


It's sit down, shut up, fall in line, do what you're told, think what what you're told, do not deviate from the norm.

I absolutely HATE this attitude. It's why I became a punk rocker in the first place. I just wanted to tell society and its standards (set by the tyrranical majority) to eff off.

End

[Makeitstop]

OK, having gone back and looked at the site, I think what she was trying to explain (in a clumsy, idiotic sort of way) with the electricity comment was that Scotland is a modern country, and that people like the windbags on the view seem to think of Scotland as it was (historically accurately or not) centuries ago.

And that is a legitimate point. I can't remember the last time I saw a depiction of Scotland which actually made it look like it belongs in the 20th/21st century. All I can ever remember are period pieces like Braveheart or Rob Roy, or something revolving around Loch Ness. In either case you will see a castle, a kilt or two, and maybe a pub.

I'm not sure, but I think the movie unleashed might have taken place in Scotland, but it doesn't make it clear. And that's also part of the problem; If a movie or show doesn't explicitly say it takes place in modern Scotland, or have some dead give away like thick Scottish accents, kilts, and a Scottish flag flying somewhere (and god only knows what alarmingly high portion of the American public wouldn't recognize the flag) people will probably just think of it as "British" and therefore associate it with england.

So when people say that all the guys in Scotland wear kilts and play bagpipes, it's kind of like saying guys in Africa wear loincloths and chuck spears at elephants. Having been to Africa, I can tell you I never once saw anyone dressed in a way that would have looked remarkably out of place in America, and unfortunately there were no elephants in the area.

[beloitpiper]

I can't remember the last time I saw a depiction of Scotland which actually made it look like it belongs in the 20th/21st century.

Trainspotting, Small Faces, Tunes of Glory, The Debt Collector, Gregory's Girl, Shallow Grave...all films set in Modern Scotland.

[Makeitstop]

Trainspotting, Small Faces, Tunes of Glory, The Debt Collector, Gregory's Girl, Shallow Grave...all films set in Modern Scotland.

Haven't seen any of them. I figured there must be some.

But I still say that depictions of scotland are far outnumbered by period pieces or nessie oriented material.