|
-
22nd November 10, 06:04 PM
#11
There is a bit of historic misconception regarding this subject. Highlanders never made some sort of rebellious decision to not wear underwear with their plaids and kilts. In fact, they wore the same kind of underwear that men did elsewhere - long shirt tails!
Historically, a man's shirt was his basic undergarment up until the early 19th century, when separate "under drawers" began to appear. Prior to that, the shirt - which in those days was knee-length - formed one's underwear, with breeches, trousers, or the kilt. The length of the shirt kept a readily washable barrier between the body and the outer garment.
When breeches/trouser-wearing men switched over to using actual under-drawers, the kilted Scots (mostly in the army) clung to the old habit of "shirt tails equals underwear"....
Brian
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin
-
-
22nd November 10, 06:48 PM
#12
 Originally Posted by Woodsheal
There is a bit of historic misconception regarding this subject. Highlanders never made some sort of rebellious decision to not wear underwear with their plaids and kilts. In fact, they wore the same kind of underwear that men did elsewhere - long shirt tails!
Historically, a man's shirt was his basic undergarment up until the early 19th century, when separate "under drawers" began to appear. Prior to that, the shirt - which in those days was knee-length - formed one's underwear, with breeches, trousers, or the kilt. The length of the shirt kept a readily washable barrier between the body and the outer garment.
When breeches/trouser-wearing men switched over to using actual under-drawers, the kilted Scots (mostly in the army) clung to the old habit of "shirt tails equals underwear"....
Dang, you beat me to it!!
"It's all the same to me, war or peace,
I'm killed in the war or hung during peace."
-
-
22nd November 10, 07:01 PM
#13
Thanks Woodsheal.
Many people need to take this into consideration as they make their judgments. Throughout the years, no matter how far back you go into civilized history, we have tried to keep some form of sanitary conditions, all dependent on what was understood at the time.
Many look at the "tradition", and want to live up to those traditions, or we can understand that time changes those "traditions" as does attitudes and knowledge surrounding them.
Thanks for reminding us of the reality of the situation.
Mark Dockendorf
Left on the Right Coast
-
-
22nd November 10, 08:02 PM
#14
 Originally Posted by Canuck of NI
the CBC Radio One show known as "As It Happens" will be covering the Scottish Tartran Authority's no-commando advice this evening.
And a fine report it was. Brian Wilton was perfectly respectful of people's decisions to go without, but spoke against the notion of brow beating people into upholding the 'no undies' fallacy. Any interpretation in the Times of the STA position being mean spirited is more likely that of the journalist and editor expressing a catchy story than Mr. Wilton or the STA getting grumpy.
-
-
22nd November 10, 08:22 PM
#15
 Originally Posted by xman
And a fine report it was. Brian Wilton was perfectly respectful of people's decisions to go without, but spoke against the notion of brow beating people into upholding the 'no undies' fallacy. Any interpretation in the Times of the STA position being mean spirited is more likely that of the journalist and editor expressing a catchy story than Mr. Wilton or the STA getting grumpy.

Thanks to xman and Woodsheal for setting the record straight.
T.
-
-
22nd November 10, 08:36 PM
#16
I've been told, and I'd appreciate a reference if it's incorrect, that in the UK military that a Soldier who is either a musicain or a dancer or any other fellow who might have his modesty compromised is out of uniform if he is not wearing underwear.
-
-
22nd November 10, 09:39 PM
#17
Hello...."underwear" can also be an underkilt - a slip-like garment that is also unbifurcated. I wear them with my kilts to protect my kilt from me while still maintaining FREEDOM.
Yes, some kilties say that wearing a slip-like garment under the kilt is feminine - but that makes absolutely no sense to me since it is as unbifurcated as the kilt itself. If the kilt is masculine then so is the unbifurcated underwear worn underneath the kilt.
You can have both hygiene AND freedom - even in the kilt rental business.

And does not Freedom Kilts still offer a very long tailed shirt for this very purpose??
Ol' Macdonald himself, a proud son of Skye and Cape Breton Island
Lifetime Member STA. Two time winner of Utilikiltarian of the Month.
"I'll have a kilt please, a nice hand sewn tartan, 16 ounce Strome. Oh, and a sporran on the side, with a strap please."
-
-
23rd November 10, 03:13 AM
#18
 Originally Posted by Woodsheal
There is a bit of historic misconception regarding this subject. Highlanders never made some sort of rebellious decision to not wear underwear with their plaids and kilts. In fact, they wore the same kind of underwear that men did elsewhere - long shirt tails!
Historically, a man's shirt was his basic undergarment up until the early 19th century, when separate "under drawers" began to appear. Prior to that, the shirt - which in those days was knee-length - formed one's underwear, with breeches, trousers, or the kilt. The length of the shirt kept a readily washable barrier between the body and the outer garment.
When breeches/trouser-wearing men switched over to using actual under-drawers, the kilted Scots (mostly in the army) clung to the old habit of "shirt tails equals underwear"....
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, A Thousand times Thank you.
Every kiltwearer in the world should be made to read and understand this. If they then choose to go without - fair enough. Personal choice is personal choice - some like tea, some like coffee. But I hate it like poison, when there is some pretence that going without is "Traditional" and you are not a real kilt wearer if you even contemplate wearing underwear.
In fact, that quote should be a sticky somewhere.
Regards
Chas
-
-
23rd November 10, 06:15 AM
#19
I usually make the observation that they didn't have underwear back "in the day" (Woodsheal's post point this out admirably) and if they did, this wouldn't be an issue. If, however, anyone has been to a museum that proudly displayed some 18th Century jockey shorts, I'd like to know.
Oh, to bury this issue for once and for all....
Best
AA
-
-
23rd November 10, 06:28 AM
#20
I mostly wear black underwear under mine. The few times I don't, I wear a homemade underkilt, made from a tee shirt, as per Steve's instructions in another thread.The first time I went commando was at a Celtic Festival. It felt great and everything was cool in both senses of the word. Then I sat on a hay bale at one of the entertainment venues. All I can say is OUCH! There are tender parts which should not even come close to being exposed to dry straw.I've only gone commando a few times since that experience, and I knew the seats were soft and comfortable before I went there.
"A day spent in the fields and woods, or on the water should not count as a day off our allotted number upon this earth."
Jerry, Kilted Old Fart.
-
Similar Threads
-
By Kiltedfirepiper in forum Miscellaneous Forum
Replies: 6
Last Post: 24th May 08, 08:57 PM
-
By Skweres in forum Kilt Advice
Replies: 6
Last Post: 14th March 07, 03:20 PM
-
By Kiltedfirepiper in forum Miscellaneous Forum
Replies: 15
Last Post: 19th December 06, 12:18 PM
-
By switchblade5984 in forum Miscellaneous Forum
Replies: 5
Last Post: 1st June 06, 04:16 PM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks