Auld Crabbits

**DWFII** · 17th July 11, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by kiltedwolfman

They are implying that they are in the know and their words should be taken with utmost seriousness.

No offense to you personally...using the word "you" rhetorically...

How do you know what they are saying or implying? Did you ask?

The whole concept of something being implied suggests that you're inferring, or assuming, or interpreting. Any or all of those reveals more about you and your preconceived ideas than it does about what the author is saying.

On some things, some issues, privileged perspective lends an authority that can only be second guessed--Asimov's "ignorance" vs. "knowledge" conundrum. On other issues, a well respected, historically accepted external authority...like a dictionary...if second guessed, only leaves the guesser looking like they have yet to get very far out of adolescence.

I've seen discussions in this very forum where people who knew nothing about history tried to tell bona fide historians that they were wrong about whether kilts were worn/known before 16th century...or some such.

On other things...a great many things that skirt the edges of being OT on this forum--such as speculation or philosophy...no one but those who are offended by such talk take it seriously. This isn't the Rocket Science Forum or the We'll Save the World Forum. It's just conversation...much like we all did in college many years ago...when we all sat around in the local off-campus pub and talked religion or politics or other world-shaking matters. Determined to solve the problems that for centuries, have eluded the wisest among us...all in one night of "bousing at the nappy."

That said, people who can demonstrate that they have thought the issues through, might have an advantage.

Here's a essay that will undoubtedly offend a huge number of people (probably not like using racial epithets, however)...but there may be a bit of truth as well. Pay particular attention (if nothing else) to the bullet points under "The Script" and the summary paragraph just below.

How all this relates to kilts or even to Auld Crabbits, I have no idea. I don't even know how the O(riginal P(ost) relates to kilts but obviously the mods think it does.

**macwilkin** · 17th July 11, 03:51 PM

No offense meant gents, but you're reading far too much into this. It was meant, as I said earlier, as a bit of fun...a witty title with a flair towards Scots dialect and colloquialism instead of the more straight forward and boring "kilted traditionalists". Again, I respect others opinions, but there's quite a bit of speculation here that really did't figure into it at all.

Look at our avatar -- Hector MacDonald of "Monarch of the Glen".

But what do I know? I'm only the guy that started the group.

T.

**Downunder Kilt** · 17th July 11, 04:05 PM

Cajunscot, you started a group for like minded members, you named it as you saw fit, people have joined the group knowing the name of it, and I suspect, thinking the title was a nice bit of fun. (I think the group name is great and as you said it goes so well with the avatar)

I am a grumpy old man and thought it was great when the BBC brought out the series Grumpy Old Men. I think some people see a label and and immediately take offence to it. without seeing a possible fun side to it.

People it's good to have a giggle at yourself sometimes

**macwilkin** · 17th July 11, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by Downunder Kilt

Cajunscot, you started a group for like minded members, you named it as you saw fit, people have joined the group knowing the name of it, and I suspect, thinking the title was a nice bit of fun. (I think the group name is great and as you said it goes so well with the avatar)

I am a grumpy old man and thought it was great when the BBC brought out the series Grumpy Old Men. I think some people see a label and and immediately take offence to it. without seeing a possible fun side to it.

People it's good to have a giggle at yourself sometimes

Well said that man!

T.

**creagdhubh** · 18th July 11, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by cajunscot

Well said that man!

T.

That's precisely it...well said indeed!

**DWFII** · 17th July 11, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by cajunscot

No offense meant gents, but you're reading far too much into this. It was meant, as I said earlier, as a bit of fun...a witty title with a flair towards Scots dialect and colloquialism instead of the more straight forward and boring "kilted traditionalists". Again, I respect others opinions, but there's quite a bit of speculation here that really did't figure into it at all.

Look at our avatar -- Hector MacDonald of "Monarch of the Glen".

But what do I know? I'm only the guy that started the group.

T.

No worries, Todd. I don't take it that seriously. That said, I find myself strangely proud to be an Auld Crabbit and since I am the only one using it in my signature (that I know of) strangely compelled to defend the notion.

But what do I know? I'm a dinosaur...

Next topic in the Traditional Highland Dress sub-forum-- "Dinosaurs of the K-T Boundary."

**gary meakin** · 17th July 11, 04:31 PM

I just thought it was because Hector MacDonald was our hero and expert on all things "auld" and "crabby"

**MacLowlife** · 17th July 11, 03:58 PM

I think the OP had a valid point, based on his notion of what an Auld Crabbit might be. I do believe that most pejorative ethnic terms are an order of magnitude beyond "Auld Crabbit" but then one man's term of endearment is another man's insult, as the OP observed.

And, of course,Political Correctness does not extend to all groups. I believe I am a member of four or five categories that are still ridiculed throughout popular culture. So be it. One of those groups is People Who Are Actually In Charge.

Thanks, DWF, for the link.