Polaris Tartan

[Cerebite]

My opinion as a Submariner:

The existence of the Polaris tartan is one of the things that got me interested in wearing the kilt and having an option [yet to find a single drop of scottish blood in 400+ years of family tree] of a tartan to wear.
I served on Real Boats not boomers and was never stationed nor visited Holy Loch so I am still convincing myself to get a Polaris Tartan [rarity and price aside]. If SubVets or the Navy [or the Royal Navy for that matter] themselves were to make it the "official" tartan of the Submarine force I would feel better about getting it myself.
The comparison between the Polaris and the Edzel/ US Navy is comperable to the comparison between the Special Forces/ US Army [granted the Special Forces tartan does have restrictions]. You can wear and respect/ represent the "more restrictive" tartan you just must be prepared for more attention/ questions from those in the know about the history of the tartan.

A lot of it comes down to "levels of fraternity." There is in this case the general fraternity of being in the Navy , then the more exclusive fraternity of the Submarine force, then within that the subset of Boomer [missile submarines for you land lubbers], and finally within that those that served on Polaris class boats or where stationed at Holy Loch which has its own tartan.
A comparable example from one of the editors at the Rocky Mtn. New who is a Vietnam era Army vet. but served as a journalist at West Point who stated that he is not "in the club" compared to combat vets who in turn are not in "the club" compared to POWs such a McCain.

Sorry for rambling but this, as I am sure you are aware, is a regular topic with regard to Military tartans and I wanted to give my perspective. As others have said you can do what you choose you just need to be prepared to answer the questions that arise.

As a couple of the other bubbleheads have mentioned the discussion of wearing dolphins [or a fouled anchor, or the eagle, globe & anchor, or a Ranger Tab] as a kilt pin or a broach is a more sensitive discussion.

[Mr. MacDougall]

I'll just mention that the Edzell tartan is in stock at USA Kilts. I don't know of anyone who has Polaris in stock; you'd have to get it specially woven.

[Monkey@Arms]

Really this is some what moot. Its a special order tartan at this point (the U.S Navy left Holy Loch decades ago.) Why would anyone go to the expense of having it woven if the tartan didn't have a special emotional significance? Having been stationed at Holy Loch, I would not hesitate to wear that tartan even though I was not a submariner. (I do have a tie in Polaris tartan.) I don't believe I ever actually saw an American wearing a kilt in any tartan in the entire two years I lived in Dunoon. (Saw damn few kilts period.)

Best regards,

Jake

[hospitaller]

I would go with the OFFICIAL stance on wearing military uniforms.

Unless you are active/retired member of any branch of any military in the world, you have no business wearing OFFICIAL uniform items.

Now, since this tartan is not official in any way, I see no problem with anyone wearing it.

99.9 of the population has not served or has any connection to the Polaris so unless there is a sudden massive amount of knowledgeable people asking abut the tartan, again, I see no problem.

This is not the UK and there are no rules or actual legal repercussions on wearing such items.

Some people I guess just see too much into things.

[macwilkin]

This is not the UK and there are no rules or actual legal repercussions on wearing such items.

Some people I guess just see too much into things.

Hector,

While I agree with the sentiments behind your post, the phrase you used above gets used quite a bit around here -- "This is not the UK" -- and quite frankly, I wince every time I read it.

Yes, we're not in the UK -- but as Americans wearing Highland attire, we should at least be mindful of the customs and traditions associated with it.

No offense meant.

Todd

[hospitaller]

No offense meant.

None taken.

Aren't those precise traditions and costumes supposed to be for surnames, hereditary nobility and clans?

I wasn't aware of anything of the like being applied to private tartan creations or fashion tartans.

[macwilkin]

None taken.

Aren't those precise traditions and costumes supposed to be for surnames, hereditary nobility and clans?

I wasn't aware of anything of the like being applied to private tartan creations or fashion tartans.

You misunderstand my meaning. My comments were directed at the phrase itself, which seems to justify people flaunting traditions just for that sake because "we're not in the UK, we're Americans".

But, in a sense, the traditions can apply to private tartan creations, as some tartans are "restricted", such as the Balmoral tartan.

In this case, whilst the Polaris tartan is not restricted, I can certainly see the reason why someone might choose not to wear it, if there is no personal connection. I can also see and respect Jake's earlier comments, especially since he served at Holy Loch.

That's all I meant.

Todd

[hospitaller]

You misunderstand my meaning. My comments were directed at the phrase itself, which seems to justify people flaunting traditions just for that sake because "we're not in the UK, we're Americans".

Oh well, I do not flaunt traditions. If there is something made to be worn, and there is no 'prohibition' or 'restriction' to wear it, then I guess I fail to see where the flaunting of traditions is.

I do not wear military uniforms, I do not wear nobility tartan or other restricted items and I do not wear mdeals or claim to be something I am not. Never have.

And yes, this is not the UK, and I am not an American either. Just a Chilean-Scot living in the US wearing whatever is available to be worn.

In this case, whilst the Polaris tartan is not restricted, I can certainly see the reason why someone might choose not to wear it, if there is no personal connection. I can also see and respect Jake's earlier comments, especially since he served at Holy Loch.

Of course, and that's why other folks at the same time why people would choose to wear it, it is a good looking tartan,
and is not restricted/official to any military branch/nobiliary title.

That's all I meant.

Understood.

[Freedomlover]

In case anyone wants to order up some Polaris tartan stock, here is a place to get it:

http://www.scotweb.co.uk/newsite/tar..._family_name=P

As of right now 1 GBP = $1.72

There are enough deep sea sailors on this board to pool up and do a run, don't ya think?

[hospitaller]

On principle I also agree with you Woot22, but then again, those are NOT 'military' tartans, but privately/comercially made using the branch name or inspired by them.

Something else to consider, this board has members frm all over the world, who may or may not have affinity for any particular country so called 'military' tartans. And some people who simply like a particular tartan, whether it is a 'military tartan' or not.

And there are some others who have served in other countries military forces, others have not.

I have seen and noticed an increase of 'military oriented' topics in this forum lately and it inevitably ends with someone's feelings being sore.

So, I will end just as I began my first reply, unless something is officially issued as a military clothing item, I personally wouldn't have problems wearing it.

Offenses are more often perceived by the receiver, not actually made by the supposed offender.

Nothing further to add from my side on this, simply wish these military questions were either reduced or the people considered the varied audience of this website.

Good evening all.