Option for official pants

[OutdoorThinker 10]

Just after joining my Venturing Crew, I spent some time in England and Scotland...actually, I have quite an entertaining story about the Baden-Powell house, but that's for another time in another post...but when we were at the Tower of London, we ran into a large group of coed teens in kilts and scout shirts. They turned out to be a Scottish Venturing Crew (or Venturing equivalent).

[andrewcanoe 10]

Even after the attack from FOG, I still do not like the look of the kilt, the same way that I do not like the look of a larger scouter in the old style shorts. It has nothing to do with nationality or ethnic pride, I wouldn't approve of 'official BSA' halter tops for female venture crew members. Not to mention the child protection issues that would arise if kilts were worn in the traditional way.

[Adrianvs 10]

Even in his day, BP admitted that over-the-knee shorts were well.. dorky looking. Men never wore shorts and only small children wore shorts that went below the knee. Regardless, he insisted on these as part of the scout (and scouter) uniform. I wish I could find where he writes that you may be called knobby-knees or something to that effect. However, some of his reasoning is shown here:

 

"Shorts are essential to hard work, to hiking and to camping. They are less expensive and more hygienic than breeches or trousers. They give freedom and ventilation to the legs. Another advantage is that when the ground is wet, you can go about without stockings and none of your clothes gets damp."

 

With the exception of expense, kilts seem to fit the bill as well as or better than shorts. hehe, I concur that regulation skivies would be appropriate.

[OutdoorThinker 10]

Adrianvs

 

I paged through my copy of Rovering to Success by Baden-Powell (a favorite birthday gift of mine this past year) and I didnt find anything about knobby knees, although I would love to read the passage if you ever do find out where B-P wrote it.

[Fat Old Guy 11]

AndrewCanoe said "Even after the attack from FOG"

 

Your comment was sexist to say the least and, despite your protestations, racist.

 

Adrianvs commented, "Even in his day, BP admitted that over-the-knee shorts were well, dorky."

 

Now, baggy shorts are in style. The big difference is that 100 years ago, the shorts were worn so that the underwear wasn't showing.

[Adrianvs 10]

Outdoor Thinker,

 

I believe I have found the quote to which I was referring. The passage I was thinking of was from Eileen Wade's book, "27 Years with Baden-Powell." It turs out that the quote wasn't given by BP and the word wasn't knobby (though I think it is better than knobby). Here is the surrounding quote:

 

 

"Like the hat, each part of the uniform had its special significance and romance. It is difficult today to realise what a sensation was caused in 1908 by the appearance of Scouts in shorts. Small boys at that time wore "long-shorts" extending below the knee, while older boys wore breeches or long trousers. In introducing shorts the Founder had to fight a certain amount of opposition, for he was told that boys would get cold through having their knees uncovered. His reply to this took the form of a sketch showing a pair of bare knees, with noses attached, and handkerchiefs blowing the same.

 

All kinds of epithets were hurled after Scouts, and a boy had to be tough to take these with a smile. "It doesn't matter if you are called 'Crusty knees'," wrote Roland Philipps in his Letters to a Patrol Leader, "so long as you are not crusty inside." As the Scout movement developed and shorts became common wear, even by men, the habit of wearing them spread throughout the country. Freedom of movement, so necessary in scouting, was soon found to be an asset in games and shorts proved an economy for the mothers of growing boys."

 

[Adrianvs 10]

Hmm, the man who said this, "Iowa, where the men are men and the sheep run scared." is concerned that another's remarks are sexist and racist.

 

Unless I am mistaken in what you mean by, "the sheep run scared" then you have no place in taking offense at another's attack on the beloved kilt. I would type my guess, but I would likely be booted from the board for the language. Besides, attacking an artifact is not racism. Stating that men should not wear the kilt is no more sexist than stating that men should. Think about it.

 

I like the kilt and if someone wants to attack it, fine. Maybe I'll defend it, but I won't start crying racism and sexism the moment someone calls it a skirt. That would only prove their point.

[packsaddle 753]

andrewcanoe,

Ooooooooohhh, haaaalter toooops. Another delicious image is forming.

Adrianvs,

Ok, what's this obsession with skivies? What is a skivy anyway? Do regulation skivies really exist?

[Adrianvs 10]

packsaddle,

 

haha, To my knowledge, I only said the word "skivies" once. In fact I had typed undies, but the word didn't look right and someone had said skivies, so I used the word.

 

I would like to know exactly what is "sooooooo delicious" about hairy legs and halter tops. Someone seems a little too excited at the prospects..

[packsaddle 753]

Adrianvs, I think the first mention was by Twocubdad and I thought you were just continuing in that spirit. Anyway, 'excited' is hardly the term I apply to my reaction. My reaction is great laughter at the thought of what I'd look like in a kilt and halter top. You get it yet? If not then add the panties to the image. Remember this is at Scout Camp. See my point?

[andrewcanoe 10]

FOG: Sorry if I upset you with my remarks about you kilts. If you want to wear one, Go for it.

 

Adrianvs: The remark about sheep confused me too. It also quite frankly suprised me coming from a scouter.

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"Ok, what's this obsession with skivies? What is a skivy anyway? Do regulation skivies really exist?"

 

Good question. I had long believed that "skivvies" was just a Naval slang term for underwear. I did know that it was first applied to t-shirts but later, through common usage, expanded to both t-shirts and underpants.

 

I went looking for a good reference and found that Skivvies was a trademark, now expired, from 1939 for a brand of t-shirt. The navy issued white t-shirts, so they became "skivvies" to differentiate them from the old fashioned singlets (what the kids now call wife beaters and what we called Dago-Ts (Hey, even Jay Leno calls them that).

 

Skivvies is never singular unless used as an adjective (skivvie shirt, shivvie shorts). There used to be regulation skivvies but I don't know anymore. I always bought my own skivvies, the only requirement was that they were white and I believe that I could wear either v-neck or crew neck.

 

If the Army uses the term skivvies, they have a regulation skivvie shirt for wear with the BDU.

 

I'm not sure if the Air Force wears underwear :-)

[OutdoorThinker 10]

I was reading the New York Times today and discovered there will be an exhibit at the Met until Feb. 8th entitled "Braveheart" and it's about men wearing kilts and other types of non-pants (like grass skirts, togas and robes during Biblical times). I thought that the exhibit was timely and figured I would share, in case any of you get to NYC before the exhibit closes -- our crew is heading to NYC, hey OGE, what do you think?

[fotoscout 15]

Here is a link to the NYT article

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/07/arts/design/07MUSC.html?8hpib

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

well, its not BSA official, but its OA official

 

http://www.sectionw3b.org/conclave/store/boxers.cfm

 

so BSA shorts cant be far behind, I think there were official 2001 National Jamboree undershorts so we do have that part of the uniform covered.

 

The Met? You mean the Met as in The Metropolitan Museum of Art? YoungSpikedEagle loved it there. Not sure if he would be up to the undie display, but he would go for other things. I hear they have a display on 19th Century China, focussing on the Boxer Rebellion