Going Regimental

[Mike_Oettle]

My remarks about the Sikh Highlander have sparked off quite a flurry of comments, not all of them polite.
I repeat that I respect the concession made to Sikh soldiers.
Had I seen the Sikh Guardsman with his low headgear, I would have found it decidedly odd, but since it obviously had official approval, it cannot be faulted.
I still feel that the bonnet badge could have been more to the left, although clearly the position was dictated by the turban’s sharp drop from the high forehead to low around the sides. All the same, I suspect that a larger turban could have been more appropriate (on both the Sikh Highlander and the Sikh Guardsman) – Sikhs in both the Indian and Pakistani armies wear quite large turbans with very fancy accoutrements.
And if the Sikh in question was a visitor to the RRoS, the situation is much more understandable.

On the subject of going regimental, it is only common sense to wear underwear with the kilt in chilly weather (although I endured a fair amount of chill on one occasion), in windy weather, or where it might help reduce the incidence of lice and related pests.
However, having become used to going regimental (in the regiment) I have preference for it where it is suitable and/or acceptable.
Remarks about dirt on the kilt seem to be made in ignorance, since my kilts (when I do wear them) are regularly washed.
Regards,
Mike

[Macman]

I'm a little late in, but I wanted to add another Canadian perspective. In my reserve regiment (the second picture in John the Biker's post) in the early 1970s, there were no undergarment inspections, and you could wear or not wear at your own discretion.

[plaid preacher]

During my college days in Toronto a group of us would go the the 48th Highlanders of Canada cenotaph service on the Sunday before Remembrance Day. One friend was a a real bagpipe nut and we would walk alongside the band for a while as the returned to the armouries. One year the reviewing dias was located on the side University Avenue between two buildings. The narrow gap between the buildings caused an odd swirl of wind that played havoc on the back of the Aide-de-Camp's kilt. I can inform you there was at least one office on parade that day with light blue briefs under his kilt.

[The Q]

I would think that there is at least one good reason why in today's Canadian Army, there would not be any inspection in kilted regiments of undergarments, or lack thereof:





Whatever the historical traditions, I would venture to suggest that things are different.

The above and things like, when I was in the RAF, the Military had Crown Immunity and could be a law unto itself. It now has to respect the EEC human rights act and health and safety laws.
I believe under those considerations an RSM carrying out the mirror on a stick check could find himself in court, since as a not being a medical practitioner he is not entitled to view a non-consenting persons private parts .
I do know that When "going commando" wearing Saxon clothing became popular among the younger population, an order was put out requiring underwear for a visit to the tailor! I couldn't understand the popularity of going commando in Saxon clothing, hard jean material or itchy military serge is most uncomfortable at the best of times.

I also believe we may have a generational problem here, The military changes all the time even though many think not. From before WW1 to probably the 80's going Regimental may well have been rigidly enforced.
Today almost certainly not, but I would bet there is a lot of peer pressure to do so still!

[Mike_Oettle]

Having tried going commando (or regimental) in trousers, I do not recommend it. Most uncomfortable.

[Antipodean Celt]

Well, this is a conversation that has gone in some surprising and interesting directions. One of the themes I detect is that inclusiveness and diversity in the armed forces of the western world, Australia included, may cause strong views.

As a presently serving member of the ADF, I have recent experience with both the defence force's struggle to be be inclusive and tolerant, and the difficulty of changing strongly entrenched cultures and behaviours. Conflict is inevitable. Change is hard.

One thing I hope is beyond debate, the armed forces should reflect the society from which they are drawn, including the norms and beliefs of that society. So in a country like Australia, with a population drawn from all parts of the world, and with a society that has clear ideas about what is acceptable behaviour in terms of respecting culture, religion and gender, the idea that the armed forces are somehow immune from that, and can exist in a time-capsule, does not withstand scrutiny.

I am proud of the leadership shown by General Morrison when yet another scandal broke. Through such courage is culture changed. http://youtu.be/QaqpoeVgr8U

all the best,

John

[Damion]

Whether one prefers the term "pandering" or "accommodating" it's ironic that opposition appears on a kilt forum, because that's exactly what the British army did in 1743 when it brought Highlanders into the army but allowed them to keep their native dress rather than require them to wear the standard uniform. And not only their traditional headdress, but kilt, sporran, hose, and weapons as well. Even the Red Coat was modified.

The highlanders were part of highland units, they didn't allow highlanders in kilts, bonnets etc to join regular units so the comparison is not valid. During the Empire, there were Sikh units, just like there were Gurkha units (still are) but a uniform was a uniform. Parts of Indian dress were even adopted such as the puggaree worn on certain hats and helmets. My own country still uses puggarees as part of military attire, but everyone in a unit should be in uniform.

[macwilkin]

The highlanders were part of highland units, they didn't allow highlanders in kilts, bonnets etc to join regular units so the comparison is not valid. During the Empire, there were Sikh units, just like there were Gurkha units (still are) but a uniform was a uniform. Parts of Indian dress were even adopted such as the puggaree worn on certain hats and helmets. My own country still uses puggarees as part of military attire, but everyone in a unit should be in uniform.

The Gurkhas adopted the pipes and other elements of Scottish regimental kit; the old the 10th (Princess Mary's Own) GR wore the Stewart Hunting tartan of the Royal Scots regiment due to a long-standing connection between the two regiments, and the RGR today wears Douglas tartan in tribute to the Cameronians (Scottish Rifles). In fact, several Sikh regiments of the old Indian Army under the Raj and the present-day Indian Republic's Armed Forces have also adopted tartans, the pipes, etc.

Your call, mate, but given what my granddad said about Johnny Gurkha and the Sikhs he saw in India and Burma during WWII, I'll let you tell them they're wrong. <grin>

[Pleater]

Firstly, thank you to those who posted here in response to remarks made about the uniform worn by the Sikh soldier. Your well considered responses are much appreciated by the moderators.

Secondly - apologies to the OP who's thread was hijacked, but I am closing the thread in order to make it clear that we have rules and whilst the moderators have leeway in the detail of their application, the rules are always the rules.

Anne the Pleater

Forum Moderator