Style, Fashion Rules, traditions, Flat caps, and the missing element...

[Monkey@Arms]

Not quite Brian, your sporran looks like it knew something was coming. Mine has to have the look of absolute horror.

I assure you Grant, that anything girded to your loin, so to speak, instantly acquires the look you describe.

Best regards,

Jake

[Rollo]

Interesting, Jamie !
For my sake, i believe in liberty ! It is often funny !

[ForresterModern]

I agree that the kilt police fear and mentality ought to be discarded by all on this forum, and would like to apologize for my kilt cop comment in a different albeit heated thread yesterday. However. we speak long and hard about respect on this forum---respect for tradition, respect for our heritage, respect for style and the "norm" of classical kilt wearing. However often the concept of respect for others rights and feelings are lost in those conversations, and when folks begin accusing certian individuals or certain acts or decidions by those individuals of being "disrespectful", it becomes more personal. In fact disrespect is a very personal thing, a personal affront to someone in particular usually, or sometimes a particular group of individuals with a common belief.

Just because someone dresses differently, does not follow the norms, may mix heritages and styles in ways not deemed historically correct, does not mean that they intend any disrespect to any person or group of persons, or heritage in general, although that is often how it is percieved by those persons feeling disrespected. But defining the boundaries of where each of us end and where the rest of the world begins is a primary issue with these kind of perceived acts of disrespect. In other words, don;t take it personally if someone doesn't agree with you about what goes with what. You may express your opinion but please don't accuse someone of an act of disrespect just becasue you do not agree with their position on the subject.

Burning American flags has for a long time been a controversial topic in the US----we have the right to do so in the first amendment of our constitution as a sign of freedom of speech and expression, but it clearly rankles a lot of folks who have in some way made a sacrifice in the name of America (war veterans in particular), and to them that flag means more than just a flag, they are far moe invested in it that others could ever imagine. It is proper for them to speak their piece/peace about the flag burning and express their disdain, but I think claiming that the flag burning is disrespectful falls far short of understanding that those sacrifices made by them were done so to protect just those very rights to the freedom to express oneself that brought about the flag burning in the first place.

History and education are great, wehn taught as defined and impassionate information transfer. It is when emotion becomes involved that the lesson is no longer valid. If yo uwant to teach the forum about something do so in an impassionate manner---teach the facts, not the opinions. If you want to express your opinion, please remove the pretense of doing so under the guise of teaching, and say just that, that it is your opinion, not historical fact or absolutely fixed convention. People here do that all the time----IMHO, my tuppence, mod hat off, etc. are all signs that forum members and moderators are setting out their person opinion----not necessarily fact or dogma, but merely one mans opinion.

People should seek at all times to maximally RESPECT each other for what and who they are, as individuals neighbors and fellow residents on this big blue ball we call earth, but at the same time respect the rights of those others to disagree with our opinions, just as we are disagreeing with theirs.

In the words of the working class ghetto town in which I grew up, "different strokes for different folks, so lets all just chill out and enjoy the ride".

[DWFII]

I think there's a confusion in many people's minds about what respect (and disrespect) really is.

In the first place, doing nothing is neither an act of respect or disrespect.

The very public and theatrical burning of a flag is not an act of respect that's for sure. It is not a passive act. It does express some sentiment or political point of view...whether the pyro wants to admit it or not. If only because like all such behaviour it is, at its core, a form of communication. And like all communication it is just as dependent upon the recipient receiving the intended "message" as the person delivering it. If flag burning is not meant as an act of disrespect, the better course would be to leave the dern flag alone!

In the second place, talking about or urging respect for traditions, culture or even other people is not the same as expressing disrespect for those who don't agree.

"Owning" or defending an issue that is not really your own, or that does not engender enough pride that you can make it wholly your own...to the point of becoming offended...sets up a situation where you are constantly on the defensive and never able to view other people's opinions dispassionately.

I have never understood the attitude that takes offense because someone else criticizes or dislikes a...what?...let's say, whisky that I like. I did not make that whisky. I don't take any personal pride in it. I do not own it nor do I feel obliged to get up in arms about it. A critque of it is just another interesting point of view.

Similarly, I am not offended by people who think I am wearing a costume because I dress in Highland attire...I am realistic...and objective...enough to call it what it is and if it is "costume," so be it. I take pride in wearing it, and what it represents and I take even greater pride in wearing it with respect.

If I were the kind of person who thought all that was nonsense ...who liked the look of the "modern" "kilt" and valued my "freedom" to thumb my nose at social convention and all those stuffy and "staunch traditionalists"... I would hope to have the objectivity and pride to disassociate myself from any notion that what I was wearing had anything at all to do with Scotland or highland attire. And I would hope that I had enough pride and objectivity to not take offense when someone else makes the same observation.

"Disrespect" is like kind of like the flu...there's enough of it going around for everybody. We don't need to become alarmed every time someone sneezes or blows their nose.

The bottom line is that if you don't want to be confronted by different points of view...or even people who disagree with you...you need to hole up indoors, never go out, and not post on forums. (and I'm sure I'll get my share here )

[ForresterModern]

Even though I believe some of what DFWII says above is likely directed at my comments I agree with a lot of what he says.

As I just said in a PM to another forum member, in my opinion "disrespect" generally requires an overt and intentional act in attempt to demonstrate that disrespect for something someone else values. I fail to see how passively wearing a piece of simple (not by and of itself offensive, else they wouldn't likely sell many) clothing or accessory in what I consider to be an attractive and not inappropriate ensemble should cause particular offense to someone I do not even know, and thereby making me be considered disrespectful of that other person. That requires instead a presupposition from that other person that what I am doing is intentionally wrong, that I know it is wrong, and am doing it anyway, at least in part to show that disrespect. When in fact all I am doing is wearing an article of clothing.

We are not talking about disrespect for a religion or race or culture or written laws or political party or right to life-----we are simply talking about how one person prefers to dress, a unique, individual, and very personal part of that persons personna, how they interact with the world.

I hate broccoli and find all members of that same family of vegetables personally offensive, both in smell and taste. But I would never presume to be offended or believe it disrespectful to me if someone else desired to cook and consume it in my presence or somewhere I was not even present (just don't cook it inside my house). So while my wearing a particular cap with a kilt may be offensive in appearence to another person, it should not be considered de facto disrespectful of that person, especially if I do not even know them personally.

[DWFII]

Even though I believe some of what DFWII says above is likely directed at my comments I agree with a lot of what he says.

Well, yes and no...I wasn't really trying to respond directly to you--just following a train of thought that your remarks prompted.

And I agree with much of what you say.

This issue...in this thread and several others that I have looked in on recently...comes down to this for me: freedom is about choice. And choice always, always, brings certain constraints and responsibilities along with it. Sometimes we call those "rules," sometimes "conventions," sometimes even "duty."

We all make a choice about how we present ourselves...on a daily basis. And no one has the right to gainsay those choices. But once you have made a choice, isn't it disrespectful to...yourself and your ability to act with, what? "integrity?"...to disavow those choices?

For instance, I'm not a Catholic (and have nothing against Catholics--my Ulster Scot grandmother was a Catholic) but if I was...and especially if I had deliberately chosen to become a member...I would feel honour bound to abide by the "rules" of the Catholic faith and church.

Similarly, if I say I wear a kilt to honour my Scots ancestry, or the traditions of the Highlands...or even because I like highland attire...I, personally, would feel honour bound to abide by the "rules," "conventions," "customs," 'traditions," (whatever way you want to express it) of highland dress. The choice I have made is a deliberate and purposeful association with a specific culture and its traditions.

If I were the kind of person who wore the kilt because I liked the freedom and...perhaps (hard for me to get into that mind-set)...avant-garde look of it, I think I would try to downplay the Scots connection as much as I could. If only because if I couldn't feel pride in wearing a "man skirt" for its own sake...couldn't find sufficient justification without calling up a somewhat spurious connection to which I didn't really owe any allegiance, it would make me defensive.

Now maybe that's why I am what Panache calls a "staunch traditionalist'--maybe I feel more comfortable with a raison d'etre for acting in a way that other, more judgmental folks might consider slightly anti-social. And maybe that's a character flaw, I don't know. But its also a survival mechanism and I never question survival traits no matter how obscure.

Now that's just me, just my opinion...but I'm the only one I can speak for with certainty.

[I just think the rubber chicken is silly...and I think that's what it's meant to be.]

[ForresterModern]

Well, yes and no...I wasn't really trying to respond directly to you--just following a train of thought that your remarks prompted.

And I agree with much of what you say.

This issue...in this thread and several others that I have looked in on recently...comes down to this for me: freedom is about choice. And choice always, always, brings certain constraints and responsibilities along with it. Sometimes we call those "rules," sometimes "conventions," sometimes even "duty."

We all make a choice about how we present ourselves...on a daily basis. And no one has the right to gainsay those choices. But once you have made a choice, isn't it disrespectful to...yourself and your ability to act with, what? "integrity?"...to disavow those choices?

For instance, I'm not a Catholic (and have nothing against Catholics--my Ulster Scot grandmother was a Catholic) but if I was...and especially if I had deliberately chosen to become a member...I would feel honour bound to abide by the "rules" of the Catholic faith and church.

Similarly, if I say I wear a kilt to honour my Scots ancestry, or the traditions of the Highlands...or even because I like highland attire...I, personally, would feel honour bound to abide by the "rules," "conventions," "customs," 'traditions," (whatever way you want to express it) of highland dress. The choice I have made is a deliberate and purposeful association with a specific culture and its traditions.

If I were the kind of person who wore the kilt because I liked the freedom and...perhaps (hard for me to get into that mind-set)...avant-garde look of it, I think I would try to downplay the Scots connection as much as I could. If only because if I couldn't feel pride in wearing a "man skirt" for its own sake...couldn't find sufficient justification without calling up a somewhat spurious connection to which I didn't really owe any allegiance, it would make me defensive.

Now maybe that's why I am what Panache calls a "staunch traditionalist'--maybe I feel more comfortable with a raison d'etre for acting in a way that other, more judgmental folks might consider slightly anti-social. And maybe that's a character flaw, I don't know. But its also a survival mechanism and I never question survival traits no matter how obscure.

Now that's just me, just my opinion...but I'm the only one I can speak for with certainty.

[I just think the rubber chicken is silly...and I think that's what it's meant to be.]

Well thought out and spoken, DFWII. Again, for the most part we agree, just to different degrees. I think your description of a staunch traditionalist puts you somewhere to the a-political right of me on the spectrum of "full freedom of kilt wearing without guilt or association"-----------"extreme proper only one right way to do it historically correct nationalist and traditionalist" (I do not use these words as typecasting or stereotyping, just as examples of exhibited behavior and opinions). As such I remain interested and eager to learn more about my heritage, to be proper and correct, but to do so within my own definition of those constraints in todays modern world instead of the purely historical one.

Example: I do not use a sporran strap (heaven forbid, gasp)---rather, due to my particular anatomic build I find that a pair of sporran hangers work better for me, and feel that falls within my parameter of maintaining the spirit of highland attire without strictly following theletter of the law. I also wear a belt pouch to one side under my jacket or sweater, something not strictly seen in the books of highland dress, but it works for me as I need to be able to get at pagers, etc... quickly sometimes when I am kilted, but do not wish to wear them overtly on my kilt belt. I wear suspenders and a belt with some kilts as they no longer fit me as well as I would like but do not feel a need to spend the extra money to have them altered a inch or two, especially knowing that my weight fluctuates enough that I will liekly get back into them sometime in the not too distant future. My choice of ties. tops, shoes, and , yes, hats, also is my own but based on my style and how I can get that style to jibe with my desires to demonstrate my Scot heritage. It may not fit convention or be historically accurate but it still falls within my personal sense of style and choice. Now we are not talking about wearing a Utilikilt with a PC and Fly plaid and army boots and cowboy hat to a proper scottish funeral or wedding. Then again, I am not a historical re-enactor either, so I feel some personalization of the package is my perogative. I mean no disrespect by making the choice of those changes to the "uniform" code, merely personalized stylistic adjustments. In other words, I wear the kilt, and associated highland attire, my own way, while still trying to maintain the integrity of the overall look and effect. I guess sometimes I do okay and others maybe not. But I have yet to see my picture on the "kilt don'ts" thread yet (this is not an invitation for somebody to go now and do it just for spite) so I think so far I am in general doing okay.

As Jamie has said, I learn the rules (and will continue to), and understand why and when it is okay to break them, and I think we can all maintain our respect for each other and the heritage we so desperately all, in our own ways, seek to maintain. Just remember that some of us are a little over to your left on the spectrum, but still on the same team overall.

[ForresterModern]

Oh, and I am not particularly fond of rubber chicken sporrans either-----have some chickens in my family tree a few branches back---but neither am I offended by or consider it disrespectful. Actually rather a delightful distraction.

[Captain Karrot]

Jamie's original post about this issue is well and timely said.

[DWFII]

FM,

I might observe first, that nothing you described about how you wear the kilt offends or disturbs me or suggests something "out of bounds," so to speak.

The kilt...even when worn by a "staunch traditionalist"...is not a uniform, after all, and if truth be told there are any number of sartorial variations that have either historical or practical antecedents. Suspenders, for instance...these are not only practical but were recognized as being practical probably at least as far back as a hundred years ago. I wear a pair of braces with one of my kilts for the same reason you wear them with yours.

I love notch lapel vests and even though the "kilt police" would probably issue me a citation (at the least), there are historical precedents for wearing notched lapel vests with a kilt that, if nothing else, make them certifiably "traditional."

Anyway, I'm not sure whether I am to the right or left (one always thinks he is in the middle ) but all of this is an interesting consideration that (thankfully) elevates our discourse above the level of chit-chat or, worse, "grunt and slap."