Just as the denim jean (a symbol of the U.S.) is now proudly displayed on many a Scot's body
That statement prompted me to respond to something I've been pondering ever since I first read this thread.

While I respect the idea that clan tartans are distinctly Scottish and I can understand the desire for Scots to keep the clan tartans rather proprietary (i.e. maintain a tradition that discourages the clan tartans from losing their significance through non-clan usage abroad), it makes me wonder why the Scots don't embrace their own tradition that they want to protect.

If Scots want to preserve the clan tartan kilt in a meaningful way, they're going to have to revive the tradition of wearing their kilts for something besides special occasions. As Jock Scot and other native Scots on this board will readily attest, kilts simply are not worn in Scotland on a regular basis. They mostly wear pants. And even American style blue jeans. How can they preserve the tradition if they aren't actually preserving the tradition? And why would they discourage others (non-Scots) from doing so if they won't do it themselves?

I don't want this to sound insulting or controversial, but I'll use the phrase anyway to convey the point: it is reminiscent of the proverbial "dog in the manger". And at this point, I'll also note that the native Scots on this board are not who I'm talking about here; I'm not accusing anyone here of that. But I think we all know that there is a contingent of Scots who are (perhaps justifiably) possessive of the use of clan tartans and are very critical of anyone outside Scotland wearing a clan tartan. At the same time, for those of us outside Scotland, we wonder why the Scots in general would not want to embrace their use of clan tartans and wear their kilts on a regular basis to honor their traditions.

I'll put it another way:

The tradition of wearing clan tartans in America (and elsewhere in the world, for that matter) started when the Scots were fleeing their homeland and there was a real fear that the tradition and culture would be lost forever. With the end of proscription and the revival of tartans (also the beginning of the idea of "clan tartans"), those who were still fleeing the hardships there were actually encouraging the use of these tartans outside Scotland. The idea being that they could preserve their culture in "lifeboats", or pockets of Scottish culture in America, Canada, or Australia.

It seems that now some Scots want us to stop. Perhaps they (again, justifiably so) think that the tradition is safe now and they needn't rely on "lifeboats" abroad to preserve the culture. But those of us descended from the original "lifeboat" culture may not necessarily agree. We see the Scottish tradition in Scotland still being lost, since they never quite returned to regular use of the kilt or clan tartans (and it seems that modern Scots at large have no interest in them except for rare occasions). And we also would feel a bit cheated of our own "lifeboat Scot" heritage by the suggestion that we should move on and find our own tartans to wear.

It's an emotional issue for sure. I can see both sides. And when we gaze into our crystal ball to see what the future will hold, I think we'll have to take these issues into account. People of Scottish heritage very much want to preserve that, even if it's only a symbolic wearing of the clan tartan. Inventing new distinctly non-Scot tartans seems a bit like turning one's back on one's own lineage. By continuing to wear clan tartans, we are doing what our forefathers wanted us to do: preserve their history and culture, even if it's not in Scotland.

*edited to add: I hope this post didn't cross over the line, since I know the thread wasn't intended to rehash the idea of "entitlement" to tartans. But I don't see how the future of clan tartan wearing can be discussed without it. So hopefully my comments will be viewed in that light...