Kilts that aren't pleated?

[The Guy in the Kilt at UC]

What does the OED mean by petticoat in this context? I "knew" it to be a feminine garment.

[vorpallemur]

What does the OED mean by petticoat in this context? I "knew" it to be a feminine garment.

That's because you're stuck in the 20th century, in which men aren't allowed to wear anything but pants. At various other points (mostly before the mid 18th century) European men wore various garments that would be called feminine today. In the mid 17th century, a type of breeches called petticoat breeches were popular. they were knee length, and had huge amounts of ungathered fabric. Pepys talks about putting both legs through one knee of his, and going the whole day like that.

[wildrover]

That's because you're stuck in the 20th century, in which men aren't allowed to wear anything but pants. At various other points (mostly before the mid 18th century) European men wore various garments that would be called feminine today.

So true...I'm reminded by a series of illustrations of St. Michael in various death-dealing poses, posted by a friend of mine on an unrelated forum...my comment was that the drawings looked like a girl with a spear, dress and all.

I dunno that it's necessarily that men can't wear anything but pants, more so that it's frowned upon when men wear what could be perceived as feminine clothing, including those ridiculous tight cargo pants with the ties and straps hanging everywhere. Too bad Structure was discontinued...Express For Men seems more like Women's Clothing For Men to me--they sell pants, but they are the most feminine pants I have ever seen marketed toward a gender that likes to drink, fight, cuss and blow stuff up.

So what makes a kilt so masculine? I'm still trying to figure this out, because it's something definite, but still intangible for me. From pictures I've seen...too short = too much thigh = looks feminine. Too long = looks too modest & restrictive = looks feminine. No pleats = looks like a woman's skirt = feminine. Is a woman's skirt = careful, that man may be the director of the FBI.

Also, I have dated two different girls who went to Catholic school, one of whom had two different skirts (one for cheerleading, one for uniform), so I've seen three of these garments, and all three were tartan and pleated...but they were definitely skirts. Sorry, don't remember if they were pleated all the way around, or if they had aprons, pins, straps, come awn, I'll be honest, I wasn't looking at their clothing. What I can say is that these pleated, tartan, unbifurcated garments were definitely being worn as skirts and I would've looked like a crossdresser had I tried to don one for a Highland games (not that I'd have fit in them, mind).

What I cannot say is what made those pleated & tartan skirts different from a pleated & tartan kilt...tho possibly the answer lies somewhere in length, swing, fitment, ease of movement, hem line, or waist height...but I can say it's definitely not a difference in gender of the wearer, as a girl in a band, wearing a kilt, is definitely wearing a kilt and not a skirt. Likewise, when I see a certain pair of Celtic rock bands perform, I want to tell certain members of the band to lose the skirts...sorry, they don't look like kilts to me.

I dunno where...but there is definitely a line between wearing a kilt and wearing feminine clothing ("crossdressing" or not). I'll wear a kilt before I'll wear any of those goofball pants from Express For Men.

Does this help? Is it simply an issue of perception, and "skirt" vs "kilt" is a technicality? I do not think that is the case...but...

At any rate, I suspect I'll either wind up hiding under a chair, or drinking with The Barry and rating "kilt-ness" both snarkily and subjectively until there is an official "kilt" checklist .

-Sean

[vipermcgee]

I didn't know repeating a question asked by a trouser-wearer (though I am one by nature) would open this large can of worms. I have indeed initiated one of the great debates of modern masculine fashion! Not that it matters as such, but I am still lost in my search for an answer. Can we, as a virtual society, establish a standard definition of "kilt" by which all men's unbifurcated garments are judged? Would that be possible without insult to any of our members? I think not! But for myself, I believe MY definition will continue to require pleats to be a true "kilt".

Seriously, I am not all that concerned about a true answer. I just hope I am prepared with an answer next time I am asked this question, should that ever come to pass.

Robert

[NewGuise]

What does the OED mean by petticoat in this context? I "knew" it to be a feminine garment.

Sorry. I should have noted that a "petticoat" ("petty" meaning secondary or subordinate as in "petty officer") was originally an undergarment for men or women. For men, early on, it was a padded garment, worn over the shirt but under a doublet. Later the term could mean "waistcoat."

But yes, the line between 'masculine' and 'feminine' garments is both thin and moveable, across culture and across time. Boys even in Victorian England, much as in Shakespeare's day, often wore clothing resembling a girl's dress until they were 6 or 7, after which they were "breeched."

[sathor]

Would that be possible without insult to any of our members? I think not! But for myself, I believe MY definition will continue to require pleats to be a true "kilt".

I met someone once that believed that if the pleats were sewn in, it was a skirt and not a kilt.

[BrettH]

It seems to me, as I learn about these things, that pleats are a necessity in order to be categorized "kilt" in my head. It also seems that an apron of some width must also be part of the thing. Pleats all the way around make a (woman's) skirt.

On the other hand, Utilikilt has as part of their FAQ:

It is often suggested that Utilikilts* are not “real kilts.” This is 100% TRUE!

“Real Kilts” are defined as: “A knee-length skirt with deep pleats, usually of a tartan wool, worn as part of the dress for men in the Scottish Highlands.”

They define their garments as "manskirts" - a more general term that would include ANY unbifurcated garment designed to be worn by men. So kilts fall under this more broad definition, but as a subcategory. Modern PV or acrylic tartan kilts would be closely related but still not technically in that category, with utility kilts and the like being more distantly related.

Ultimately, the categorization will be determined by how loosely, or how traditionally, you define "kilt."

And after writing this, now I'm interested in why kilts do have that apron, where women's skirts might not.

[cessna152towser]

Pleats all the way around make a (woman's) skirt.

Yes, I'd agree pleats all the way around make a skirt but there are skirts for men available in Europe which are box pleated all round:-

Those of us who know about kilts would call this garment a manskirt but the average person on the street here in southern Scotland will see it as a kilt because it is worn by a male.

[BrettH]

Yes, I'd agree pleats all the way around make a skirt but there are skirts for men available in Europe which are box pleated all round:-

Those of us who know about kilts would call this garment a manskirt but the average person on the street here in southern Scotland will see it as a kilt because it is worn by a male.

There you go ruining my nice, neat categories. Nice-looking manskirt, though

[Old Hippie]

An interesting distinction just occurred to me. Feel free to shoot it down.

"Pleats" may not be the issue. Many women's skirts are pleated. I wonder if a "real" kilt (whatever that is ) could be characterised with deep pleats as opposed to pleats that are really quite shallow and only meant to give some visual interest to the garment.

Deep pleats allow for vigorous movement, such as running and leaping because they can open out as necessary.

Your turn...