Someone on Facebook is asserting that if a kilt isn't in a tartan, then it's just a "man skirt."
What, exactly, does he think a kilt is?
It's a fucking skirt. Worn by men.
Even if it's your family tartan.
Perhaps, especially so.
Click here to submit $0.00 US for a lifetime subscription
Posts
Comments
There's nothing unmanly about wearing a garment intended to be worn by a man. Just because the English didn't wear kilts didn't mean the Scots couldn't. How does he know that historically a lot of Scots didn't wear plain colored kilts for everyday? It would seem like the fancy plaid ones would be expensive for wearing while working, etc. A lot of men traditionally wore what are essentially dresses in middle eastern or African cultures. A lot of things made sense historically due to climate, or the ability to cut and tailor cloth. It's kinda xenophobic to be critical about these things. History is what it is. Facebook idjits shouldn't try to re-write it because they want to be a jackA$$.
ReplyDelete-swj
Until about 1200, men in Europe also wore basically dresses. Eh, fashion.
DeleteAs to kilts, eh, fashion.
I think so as well. A skirt is just a description of what the apparel is. An apron is just a protective covering of outside clothing. A shop apron or culinary apron - same purpose. The same with a skirt or kilt.
ReplyDeletejrg
Living in Florida, the thought of a kilt sounds excellent, until mosquito season. Been bit down there, not a pleasant sensation.
ReplyDelete