Undies under the Kilt

[McClef]

The PC world takes over, its such a shame, why should we adapt so because someone might find what we do offensive. We have the same rights as anyone else!!

I would agree that PC has gone rather crazy, even to the extent that the alleged potentially offended parties have stated themselves that they would not be offended. I haven't, however, seen anyone here state that what they choose for themselves should be adapted by all, they are simply giving their own reasons with which you have a perfect right to disagree.

Trefor:

My dear fellow, it's all a matter of perspective! I stand a short slice over six feet. My daughters stand, respectively, at about two feet and one meter (over a yard, but just by a bit). They can "see up" things I "look down" at.

And do your daughters ever say they notice anything the first place Jock? Two feet or one metre would both take their eyes above my knees (I am about the same height as your good self). I have kids wandering around when I go shopping and they never appear to have seen anything possibly offensive. If, as is believed, the vast majority of Scots are regimental, then surely there would be shock! horror! stories abounding all over the place if the bairns were being exposed to sights they shouldn't be.

Of course it's up to the individual's choice and it could well be a transatlantic cultural difference in what is deemed shocking, or rather potentially shocking, but I wonder if experience really bears outs potential predictions of disaster.

[Martin S]

Turpin wrote:

"This is a day shirt I picked up at the Blairsville games. "

With a shirt like that, Turpin, why bother with a kilt?

Martin

[Colin]

Okay, this one is now starting to walk a very fine line guys. Let's bring it back to the original question and keep it on track or it will be locked down.

[Captain]

*** for Body Glide... the stuff is amazing!

[MysticMead]

I can think of another good reason to wear undies under the kilt... cats... we have a Siamese that attempted to climb my leg ONCE... had a good talk with the cat... explained that what she saw was NOT a new toy to play with...think the conversation went something like... if you try that crap again I'm going to teach you how to fly.... if she tries again, I'm getting a dog...

[Phil]

I read the rules and I couldn’t tell if this would be a taboo subject or not. If I broke the rules I apologize, please feel free to delete or move. I won’t be offended.

I have a legitimate question regarding what’s under the kilt. I’m not asking if you do or don’t wear underwear, (I don’t want to know) what I’m curious is, is there a legitimate reason not to wear underwear? Where did it start and why is it that we don’t wear underwear today? When I hike and do certain things I think I would prefer some support.

There is no legitimate reason to wear or not to wear anything under the kilt. It is a purely personal decision on the part of the wearer in the same way that others may choose whether or not to wear underwear under (prepare yourselves for this) ..pants. I do think, however, that as has been said already, there is no excuse for indecent exposure in the presence of ladies and underwear should certainly be worn when dancing. On a related subject can anyone enlighten me as to why American stores sign their underwear sections as "Intimate Apparel"? Is this just an example of two nations separated by a common language as Churchill said or more a national coyness and reserve?

[Mr. MacDougall]

On a related subject can anyone enlighten me as to why American stores sign their underwear sections as "Intimate Apparel"? Is this just an example of two nations separated by a common language as Churchill said or more a national coyness and reserve?

A little of column A, a little of column b?

First of all, it's mostly just women's underthings that are labeled such... or at least, I can't recall having seen men's labeled that way. And yes, some of it is a "sex sells" kind of thing. But some of it is just that that's the way it is.

[Phil]

A little of column A, a little of column b?

First of all, it's mostly just women's underthings that are labeled such... or at least, I can't recall having seen men's labeled that way. And yes, some of it is a "sex sells" kind of thing. But some of it is just that that's the way it is.

Thanks for that. I was just wondering and, as you say, it sounds more appropriate in the context of women's stuff. Better get off this subject before it gets banned.

[cacunn]

I believe and have no historical data to support this opinion that there was a practical reason not to wear anything under the kilt when the kilt was first worn in Scotland. At the time kilts started cotton, if it was available in Scotland it would have been very expensive. The same would have been true of linen and silk. Because of the expense I don't think you would have wanted to hide such an expensive cloth.

On the other hand wool was readily available. I don't know about you but if the choice is between "tight" woolen underwear or being free under a loose kilt, I'll take freedom any day. The thought of scratchy wool underwear makes me shrink in fear.

[TimC]

I wear "unders" when I throw...so as not to throw more that I had expected

-Tim