With your statement I could say that if you want to dress up as a mushroom, then that's fine. Just don't go hiding under the guise of "cosplay". People who wear mushroom costumes are people who want to fuck fungi.
First, I meant no sexual undertone. Gay, straight, asexual, doesn't matter; I speak strictly of the act of dressing up as the opposite sex -- which does not always have a sexual undertone. Second, my problem is with the masculinity trying to be associated with the kilt, and the culture around it. Cosplay isn't trying to hide that I am dressed up as a mushroom man, it does not pretend that I am not a nerd for standing on the plaza handing out 1-ups to people, and I do not live in a facade where putting a toadstool on my head makes me more human (the analogy's breaking down, but you know what I mean.) If a kilt-wearer knows and admits that he is wearing womens clothing, and more feminine for doing so, then he is fine and I will not mock him. However, when Rym is somehow more manly for wearing his kilt and ballet shoes at CTcon, that's BS.
Why do we have to separate male garments from female ones?
I accidentally wore my girlfriend's jeans one day. If someone had taken more care when seperating the laundry I would have had a much more comfortable day.
my problem is with the masculinity trying to be associated with the kilt
If a kilt-wearer knows and admits that he is wearing womens clothing, and more feminine for doing so, then he is fine and I will not mock him.
So your saying you have a problem with a gender construct being assigned to a pieces of clothing because you believe that the wrong gender construct is being assigned? Right, okay. Let's have a history lesson.
The earliest known skirt was discovered in armenia, dating back to 3900BCE. It's a straw-woven skirt, so it's likely that everyone wore them (straw doesn't give easily to trousers), or a variation on draped pelts or straw. Then you've got the lungi, kanga, and sarong, worn by both sexes seemingly since time immemorial; and yes, same goes for the kilt, which came up around the same time as the female skirt in Scotland. It's really only recently, back maybe 200 years, that skirts were even remotely considered "feminine" and even then only in Western cultures. Even dresses are somewhat suspect; pants are a very recent innovation, and just look at the kimono and the toga.
Skirts were never originally gendered, and you're projecting your own preconceived notions onto things in order to categorize people. It's not a nice habit to get into, especially since clothing (except for the bra) is not gendered.
The earliest known skirt was discovered in armenia, dating back to 3900BCE. It's a straw-woven skirt, so it's likely that everyone wore them (straw doesn't give easily to trousers), or a variation on draped pelts or straw. Then you've got the lungi, kanga, and sarong, worn by both sexes seemingly since time immemorial; and yes, same goes for the kilt, which came up around the same time as the female skirt in Scotland. It's really only recently, back maybe 200 years, that skirts were even remotely considered "feminine" and even then only in Western cultures. Even dresses are somewhat suspect; pants are a very recent innovation, and just look at the kimono and the toga.
Not to mention the Sarong, which I'd assume most westerners would consider something like a skirt, or women's beachwear, is common male clothing in many countries of South east Asia, particularly Indonesia, even today. So either a good portion of this part of the world is in the closet, or...
The biggest issue that comes into play when wearing anything is whether it suits you or not. I see people daily who cannot even pull off a shirt and jacket. It has got to be tailored and you have to look good in it. There is nothing worse than someone wearing a kilt who does not have the legs for it. Its the same with suits, my girlfriends summer job is at a high end tailors and she does the fitting for suits and shirts. Dear got the tales she tells me about people at times.
Wow, I shoulda known I'd stir up a gay debate; there's always that one!!...Why comment if this isn't your kinda topc? BAKA! At least THIS idiot has some clearly misguided religious "reasoning" to his argument:
"Did men Wear Skirts in the Old Testament? No, they wore robes with outer skirts. This is VERY different from the skirts we see today." http://www.dividedbytruth.org/BD/kilts.htm
What a frakkin' idiot. He say's they did and didn't wear skirts. Bi-furcated garments of different styles have been worn throughout most of human history by both sexes. YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID.
Why do I find this whole post...well, endearing? It's like seeing a child take his first steps upon a vast world. Well done, kid. You're making me feel old.
If a kilt-wearer knows and admits that he is wearing womens clothing
Except that kilts are mens' clothes.
Yes, 19th century men.
A history of transvestism
We do not live in the world we want to live in, nor the world we used to live in, we live in the world we currently must live in. A kilt is a skirt, and a skirt has not been common wear for men since the middle ages (I might be wrong on that, but it has been at least a century or two.) I appreciate the increased interest in skirts recently -- as they are much more comfortable and reasonable for many situations. What I don't appreciate is that these people run away from the femininity (that shouldn't be a word) of it.
Why do we have to separate male garments from female ones? Gender is a nebulous construct, anyway. If you like it, then wear it.
So that clothing companies can continue to deprave women of good pockets and keep the handbag industry alive. It's the only reason I don't buy women's jeans.
What I don't appreciate is that these people run away from the femininity (that shouldn't be a word) of it.
Or maybe it's not a feminine thing. I can't speak for many other people, but I am what I am, and what I am is a dude. A very laid back dude, but a dude none the less. I don't fancy to be a woman, I'm not in the closet - quite the contrary, in fact, I make a point of being open and honest about most things - I just wear one style of cloth covering because I fucking well feel like it, no less arbitrarily than the difference between one video game Tshirt or another.
I'm sorry if you feel fucking lonely or alone, or whatever the fuck you've got going on, but quit projecting your bullshit on everyone else. Go join a fuckin' support group or some shit, I don't know. Most people are not running from the femininity of it, they just want to wear a kilt, or a skirt, or a sarong, or what ever the bloody fuck they like. I'm sorry this doesn't mean we get to run around giggling or clucking our tongues about how in the closet everyone who chooses one bit of cloth over another is, but frankly, that's not really a habit I want to get into to begin with, because it's extraordinarily cuntish.
What I don't appreciate is that these people run away from the femininity (that shouldn't be a word) of it.
Wow, OK, so we can't make a conscious effort to re-purpose an article of clothing or change its social "assignment?"
Why the fuck shouldn't we be able to make a skirt masculine? Are skirts feminine by definition? NO! That's fucking ludicrous.
Gender roles have changed over time because of concerted efforts of like-minded individuals.
You're right, we live in the world we live in, but through concerted efforts, we can turn it into the world we want.
I often tell people that their opinion is wrong, to be a sarcastic ass and make a joke in a heated discussion. But seriously, you're just fucking wrong here.
You're right, we live in the world we live in, but through concerted efforts, we can turn it into the world we want.
He also forgets that in the world we live in - as opposed to the world he lives in - a kilt is an item of MEN'S clothing, for the most part. He can't have it both ways - complaining that the world of the past or the future isn't the world we live in right now, and then go on to say "Therefore (Conclusion which doesn't line up with the world we live in right now)."
Of course, I wonder if he wants to also have a crack at women wearing pants. Because every woman that wears pants is just running away from the fact that she really wants to be a man, no?
ok, so anyway, here's a cool video on making your own.
There a lots of sites to buy kilts of all quality ranges, from cheap $40 acrylic, 'pakistani' ones like stillwaterkilts.com or heritageofscotland.com to the $$$ big boys like Lochcarron or Geoffry Tailor. I'm looking at www.sportkilt.com to start.
Gender roles have changed over time because of concerted efforts of like-minded individuals.
Actually, in my experience, they have changed over time because of concerted efforts of people who hated each other even more than the people they worked against. Despite how much we are bickering now, both I and you will ultimately be responsible in a movement towards the destruction of gender stereotypes.
Or maybe it's not a feminine thing. I can't speak for many other people, but I am what I am, and what I am is a dude. A very laid back dude, but a dude none the less. I don't fancy to be a woman, I'm not in the closet - quite the contrary, in fact, I make a point of being open and honest about most things - I just wear one style of cloth covering because I fucking well feel like it, no less arbitrarily than the difference between one video game Tshirt or another.
I never said that people who wear kilts are running away from wanting to be a woman, just wanting to dress like them. Wearing a kilt is a queer thing. I don't understand why there has to be a difference between this: And this:
Tell that to a burly Scotsman in Traditional dress, or a Scottish piper, or an Indonesian man wearing a sarong.
I don't understand why there has to be a difference between this:
There is a very clear difference there - about Six and a half inches, at least. And His Skirt is longer, too.
It think we're coming at this from different places - Most of us agree that there is little FUNCTIONAL difference between a kilt and a skirt, but we disagree that it's an inherently "Queer" thing, any more than a woman wearing pants or jeans, and we back this up with the fact that traditionally, skirt-like garments have always been worn by either men or both.
For example, I'm sure you'd agree that a sarong is also a very feminine garment, and quite skirt-like. But I can tell you for an absolute fact I don't wear one because I want to dress in women's clothing, because if I wanted to dress in women's clothing, I would, and watch the fuck out anyone who wanted to hassle me about it. Yeah, I'll break a man's jaw while I'm wearing an evening dress, if he gives me drama about it. But the real reason I wear a sarong is that it's hot as fuck and humid as where I live, and it's simply more comfortable than wearing pants, and I don't like shorts.
If you want to talk SPECIFICALLY about kilts, then there is actually functional design differences between a men's kilt and a woman's kilt, thus differentiating the two enough that unless you want to stick to the position that skirts of all forms are universally female, which is demonstrably untrue.
I would like to clear something up: both of the people pictured are men. The latter is a picture of Kuranosuke from "Princess Jellyfish." My point wasn't about the specific garments being worn by the two, but rather the more abstract act of them wearing what they wear.
Tell that to a burly Scotsman in Traditional dress, or a Scottish piper, or an Indonesian man wearing a sarong.
Comments
(So inside baseball, gave me good raugh.)
I haff twelve metchsteek.
Gender is a nebulous construct, anyway.
If you like it, then wear it.
The earliest known skirt was discovered in armenia, dating back to 3900BCE. It's a straw-woven skirt, so it's likely that everyone wore them (straw doesn't give easily to trousers), or a variation on draped pelts or straw. Then you've got the lungi, kanga, and sarong, worn by both sexes seemingly since time immemorial; and yes, same goes for the kilt, which came up around the same time as the female skirt in Scotland. It's really only recently, back maybe 200 years, that skirts were even remotely considered "feminine" and even then only in Western cultures. Even dresses are somewhat suspect; pants are a very recent innovation, and just look at the kimono and the toga.
Skirts were never originally gendered, and you're projecting your own preconceived notions onto things in order to categorize people. It's not a nice habit to get into, especially since clothing (except for the bra) is not gendered.
/sarcasm
"Did men Wear Skirts in the Old Testament? No, they wore robes with outer skirts. This is VERY different from the skirts we see today." http://www.dividedbytruth.org/BD/kilts.htm
What a frakkin' idiot. He say's they did and didn't wear skirts. Bi-furcated garments of different styles have been worn throughout most of human history by both sexes. YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilt
I'm sorry if you feel fucking lonely or alone, or whatever the fuck you've got going on, but quit projecting your bullshit on everyone else. Go join a fuckin' support group or some shit, I don't know. Most people are not running from the femininity of it, they just want to wear a kilt, or a skirt, or a sarong, or what ever the bloody fuck they like. I'm sorry this doesn't mean we get to run around giggling or clucking our tongues about how in the closet everyone who chooses one bit of cloth over another is, but frankly, that's not really a habit I want to get into to begin with, because it's extraordinarily cuntish.
Why the fuck shouldn't we be able to make a skirt masculine? Are skirts feminine by definition? NO! That's fucking ludicrous.
Gender roles have changed over time because of concerted efforts of like-minded individuals.
You're right, we live in the world we live in, but through concerted efforts, we can turn it into the world we want.
I often tell people that their opinion is wrong, to be a sarcastic ass and make a joke in a heated discussion. But seriously, you're just fucking wrong here.
Of course, I wonder if he wants to also have a crack at women wearing pants. Because every woman that wears pants is just running away from the fact that she really wants to be a man, no?
There a lots of sites to buy kilts of all quality ranges, from cheap $40 acrylic, 'pakistani' ones like stillwaterkilts.com or heritageofscotland.com to the $$$ big boys like Lochcarron or Geoffry Tailor. I'm looking at www.sportkilt.com to start.
And this:
It think we're coming at this from different places - Most of us agree that there is little FUNCTIONAL difference between a kilt and a skirt, but we disagree that it's an inherently "Queer" thing, any more than a woman wearing pants or jeans, and we back this up with the fact that traditionally, skirt-like garments have always been worn by either men or both.
For example, I'm sure you'd agree that a sarong is also a very feminine garment, and quite skirt-like. But I can tell you for an absolute fact I don't wear one because I want to dress in women's clothing, because if I wanted to dress in women's clothing, I would, and watch the fuck out anyone who wanted to hassle me about it. Yeah, I'll break a man's jaw while I'm wearing an evening dress, if he gives me drama about it. But the real reason I wear a sarong is that it's hot as fuck and humid as where I live, and it's simply more comfortable than wearing pants, and I don't like shorts.
If you want to talk SPECIFICALLY about kilts, then there is actually functional design differences between a men's kilt and a woman's kilt, thus differentiating the two enough that unless you want to stick to the position that skirts of all forms are universally female, which is demonstrably untrue. Why Buy a scarf when you can grow your own?