Quote Originally Posted by bikeolounger View Post
I do not own, and refuse to buy, a full set of "black tie" garb. I would use such attire at most once every four or five years, and would have to manufacture reason to do that. I'm not likely to go to the trouble to rent formal wear, either--that level of formality is just too artificial for me. In short, if the invitation specifies "black tie," I won't be there. You need not worry about seeing me wearing a tartan tie over my tweed kilt at your precious black tie event.

Remember, gents, that kilts were originally WORK clothing for rural folks, not formal wear. My grandmother taught us to "put your best money in your everyday shoes," meaning buy good quality on what you will wear often. Don't spend money on stuff you won't use.
I've never understood the connotation that "rural" people somehow resent all manner of "proper" attire. I've heard this a lot here in SW Missouri, but if you look at photos from the late 19th century/early 20th century, people simply knew the levels of attire for certain functions. Robert Burns was a puir ploughman frae Ayr, but he also could socialise with the gentry, and benefited from it through patronage.

My grandfather and great-grandfather, for example, were Iowa farmers, but both owned suits (not just one), French-cuff shirts and other kit. Sure, they wore overalls in the fields, but when it was time to go to church or lodge, they wore their best, as they respected those institutions.

Yes, the kilt may have been "work" clothes at one time, but the kilt also could be "formal" attire as well -- the pedigree isn't really a good excuse for rejecting formal attire.

I'm afraid this post is just as judgemental of those of us who take pride in our formal attire as the people who judge those who do not wear it.

Regards,

Todd