Kilts that aren't pleated?

[Urchurdan]

Sorry had to delete, bad pic

[CDNSushi]

I'm sure that in some instances the line is a bit fuzzy (like when the pleats are ill-defined) but I would venture to say that this would be the case with some modern/contemp. "kilts." As for any traditional kilt (what would be normally accepted as such) would have back pleats and a front apron.

[Pleater]

I would definitely be definite about this - to kilt is to fold up to the waist - in song and story it is the case, so a kilt has to have pleats, folds - I could just about let gathers in but 'ample' would have to figure in the description.

Simply engineering a skirt to the male form does not make it a kilt - but a skirt with pleats all around is something seen in various portraits of kilted Scots - I would be less likely to disqualify a garment from being kilted for having an excess of pleats than for having too few.

Anne the Pleater :ootd:

[Chas]

This is THE fundamental question of kilting and as a group we have shied away from it so many times.

What is a kilt? What is the definition? What do we as the largest kilt wearing group on the internet or for that matter in the world accept as a kilt.

We would mock and deride someone for wearing a left-hand opening kilt as a woman's garment. Yet we willingly accept things that are not even made of a fabric.

We probably need a new thread, led by one of the mods. A serious debate as to what is and is not a kilt is needed. We do not want or need to have a definition imposed upon us, we need to debate it for ourselves. Unless we decide what is acceptable what is not, then by default everything is acceptable.

It is all very well having a family friendly forum, where the discussion of religion and politics and weapons and other things is forbidden. Unless we come to some consensus, what we are talking about becomes irrelevant.

Regards

Chas

[Jock Scot]

This is THE fundamental question of kilting and as a group we have shied away from it so many times.

What is a kilt? What is the definition? What do we as the largest kilt wearing group on the internet or for that matter in the world accept as a kilt.

We would mock and deride someone for wearing a left-hand opening kilt as a woman's garment. Yet we willingly accept things that are not even made of a fabric.

We probably need a new thread, led by one of the mods. A serious debate as to what is and is not a kilt is needed. We do not want or need to have a definition imposed upon us, we need to debate it for ourselves. Unless we decide what is acceptable what is not, then by default everything is acceptable.

It is all very well having a family friendly forum, where the discussion of religion and politics and weapons and other things is forbidden. Unless we come to some consensus, what we are talking about becomes irrelevant.

Regards

Chas

Out of interest it was standard practice many years ago for the aprons of
kilts to be reversed so that another umpteen years of use for a "working kilt" could be had. I am not sure how it was done though.

As to your main point, you are quite right to raise it, I have my doubts that an answer will be found that will satisfy every one , or even, any one. I am now heading for my bunker!

[dfmacliam]

I believe if it's not pleated... It's a skirt... You will not call a sarong a kilt, or an apron, or a towel, or whatever... I know we have discussions on the type of pleating that constitutes a "real" kilt, so why should an unpleat item, even be considered a kilt, only to masculinize, by name, a skirt for mens wear.

[Pleater]

The left opening for women convention is not global - for instance kimono are never worn left opening by living people - only a corpse is dressed with the kimono left opening.

My son bought a zipped jacket in America and discovered that the slider is put onto the other side of the zip from what he is used to in UK bought garments.

I suspect that what is regarded as a set in stone never broken orientation in some places, cultures and societies is in fact something which has been given spurious importance by a few people.

When I was in Junior school I wore kilts which were right opening, and no one ever commented on it. I think it was not all that important.

Anne the Pleater :ootd:

[Chas]

The left opening for women convention is not global - for instance kimono are never worn left opening by living people - only a corpse is dressed with the kimono left opening.

My son bought a zipped jacket in America and discovered that the slider is put onto the other side of the zip from what he is used to in UK bought garments.

I suspect that what is regarded as a set in stone never broken orientation in some places, cultures and societies is in fact something which has been given spurious importance by a few people.

When I was in Junior school I wore kilts which were right opening, and no one ever commented on it. I think it was not all that important.

Anne the Pleater :ootd:

Anne, I don't think we should muddy the waters with discussions of any other garment other than kilts. We will only get bogged down and go nowhere, because how other cultures treat their own garments has little or no bearing on kilts and kilt wearing.

I do not know when 'women's kilts' first appeared and likewise when you went to junior school, but I would have thought that at that time there was only one type of kilt available. Maybe there were kilt like skirts for girls - I do not know. Certainly none of your fellow pupils would have had enough fashion sense to know the difference between a true kilt and a kilt like looking garment.

Regards

Chas

[The Barry]

To settle this issue, I believe that we need a living, breathing "kilt discern-er"

I nominate myself, because I'm bored this morning.

So, in the future, if Barry says "Kilt!", it is a kilt; however, if Barry says "Shameful man-skirt!", it is obviously not a kilt.

[NewGuise]

I believe if it's not pleated... It's a skirt...

The Oxford English Dictionary defines "kilt" as "A part of the modern Highland dress, consisting of a skirt or petticoat reaching from the waist to the knee: it is usually made of tartan cloth, and is deeply plaited round the back and sides; hence, any similar article of dress worn in other countries." The first attestation recorded is from c.1730, and clearly refers to a belted plaid, with folds or pleats; the next-cited is from 1746 - the prohibition of highland dress - and refers to "The...philebeg or little kilt."

The verb, "to kilt," has a much longer history, though, showing up as early as 1340 in reference to 'virtue kilted with power'; a fifteenth-century Latin-English dictionary translates "to kylte" as succingere - normally translated as "to gird," that is, to encircle, or girdle (or fasten with a belt). But by 1887, at least, the word can specifically mean "To gather in vertical pleats, fastened at the top and free at the bottom, as in a kilt."

So .. yes. According to a long history of word use, a "kilt" has pleats, and is fastened - with belt, buckles, or even velcro - around the waist.