8.07.2008

The Male Unbifurcated Garment

Letter carrier Dean Peterson wants to wear a kilt on the job

Excerpt:

A 6-foot-tall, 250-pound letter carrier is campaigning for the right to take off his pants. Dean Peterson wants the U.S. Postal Service to add kilts as a uniform option for men.

The idea was soundly defeated in July at a convention of his union, the 220,000-member National Letter Carriers' Association, so Peterson knows convincing management will be an uphill struggle, but at least he'll be comfortable in his kilt, or Male Unbifurcated Garment.

"In one word, it's comfort," he said.

With his build, Peterson said, his thighs fill slacks to capacity, causing chafing and scarring.

Peterson, 48, has Finnish and Norwegian ancestry but not Scottish. He began wearing kilts a couple years ago when his wife brought one back from a trip to Scotland. (A spokeswoman for Britain's Royal Mail said kilts are not allowed as part of its letter carrier uniforms.)

Now Peterson wears them everywhere -- to one son's football games, the other son's concerts, shopping and gardening.

"It's the difference between wearing jammies to bed and wearing your work clothes to bed," he said.


Comment: Sounds comfy. I would never learn to keep my legs together seated!

20 comments:

  1. -
    The guy is a closet cross dresser, plain and simple.
    -
    What ever happened to the MEN of America????
    -

    ReplyDelete
  2. -
    The guy is a closet cross dresser, plain and simple.
    -
    This is yet another example of the Feminization of american males. What ever happened to the MEN of America????
    -

    ReplyDelete
  3. To equate kilts to feminine skirts is completely ignorant. One benefit of wearing a kilt is you can easily identify the idiots with feelings of inadequacy by their comments about cross dressing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As a member of the female of the species, let me say that I am completely down with the idea of kilts (or, unbifurcated male garments, as the article calls them). Historically speaking, trousers are a far more recent fashion development than unbifurcated garments. Think robes, togas, tunics, etc. And, if you think that wearing kilts are a harbinger to the feminization of men, I challenge you to tell a Scotsman carrying a broadsword or tossing the caber (a log the size of half a telephone pole and a staple event at the Highland Games) that he's a pansy. I am willing to bet that you will end up with that caber in a place that leaves no doubt in anyone's mind who the sissy is...
    There is something irresistably sexy about a man in a kilt. Word.

    ReplyDelete
  5. JP, with your last article did you also copy all the comments from someone elses blog? I've never seen so many comments at your blog. I thought I was the only one here, with occasional comments by B. Bubba once in awhile. Are all the people coming out of the woodwork today, or did you just cut and past another blog's comments? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Question: with your last article did you also copy all the comments from someone elses blog?

    Answer: No

    ReplyDelete
  7. I couldn't care less about dresses on mailmen. What I find fascinating is that of all the hundreds of articles and entries that JP posts, most of them get ignored with no comments. Many of the articles are very interesting. This one is stupid, yet it's the one gets all the action. :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't mind the idea of letter carriers wearing a kilt, but part of me wonders whether the real issue is Mr. Peterson's weight, and/or the fit of garments provided for mail carriers.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If he's anything like me he sweats very easily and gets uncomfortable before very long. I'm a pretty corpulent guy and I don't even need to move around and I can start to sweat. Just add a little physical movement and it's Niagara Falls. But aren't mailmen supposed to be skinny? Isn't "fat mailman" an oxymoron?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ya know, one big reason NOT to let postmen wear kilts is that if you let them have the kilt, they'll want a Claymore, too. Not a good idea in the Post Office. :^)

    And interesting thought, anon....I would think that "natural fibers" and "good quality undergarments" would do a world of good, but then again, I'm "only" carrying an extra 30 lbs, so maybe I just don't get it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. No need for quotation marks for only 30lbs. I'm "only" 130lbs overweight. And that's putting it conservatively!......I like natural fibers, although I must admit, the wonders of science never cease to amaze me. They can make man-made materials now that are as soft and luxurious as all-natural fibers.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Men and women have been wearing skirts and robes (unbifurcated garments) for about 2.5 Million years. By contrast, pants have only been around for about 1,000 years, or 0.04% of the time. Put simply, men have been wearing skirts and robes 2,500 times longer than they've been wearing pants. Furthermore, a full third of all men around the world wear, to this day, skirted garments and/or robes for everyday wear.

    Thus, comment's like Jim Sample's "closet cross-dresser" are absolutely, utterly, and incontrovertibly ignorant. They're not stupid - they're merely grossly uninformed, and, quite obviously, don't get out very much (do you, Jim?).

    As for me and the boys, we'll take the breeze, please. :)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Tupenu, sulu, lavalava, kilts, sarong, kikoy, caftan, djellaba, tunic are a small amount of, yes, let's use the correct word, skirted MALE garments, are ALL worn IN this world WE all now live in. They are all worn by MEN that would gladly shove your heads up your "other" end if they heard you infer they were some sort of "crossdresser" because they don't ride horses or Harleys and therefor don't NEED trousers for anything. I have a site online for Manly MEN who prefer a M.U.G. over trousers for comfort and physical health. Trousers are proven to contribute to the onset of various cancers of the prostrate and crotch area. My site is www.http://skirts4men.myfreeforum.org/

    ReplyDelete
  14. One of the primary purposes of clothing is to keep the wearer comfortable. In hot climates clothing provides protection from sunburn or wind damage, while in cold climates its thermal insulation properties are generally more important.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Little improvement is needed to catch up the level where you should feel comfortable. I hope you will do that. Thanks for this post.

    ReplyDelete
  16. He should wear what he he wants and feel comfortable with.

    best regards.

    http://www.micro-tronik.com/

    ReplyDelete
  17. It just shows you he's got the balls to make changes.After all men's clothing has been enforced by Christian morality,nothing to do with comfort(men's testes produce more fertile sperm when not restricted by trousers)In a secular country like America freedom and self expression are part of society.After all trousers are a modern phenomenon.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The only men I saw in Scotland wearing a kilt were those who worked in tartan shops, standing on street corners playing their bagpipes, appearing in highland games or the military tattoo. Contrary to popular opinion, they do wear jeans and dress pants.Mailmen no longer have to wear uniforms. Many where I live wear shorts and jeans. The guy who wants to wear kilts because he is fat is just using that as an excuse to cross dress.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I have come to believe that gender specific clothing is just silly. Waaay too much emphasis is put on whether a garment is for a woman or a man. Do you think I care if you wear a pair of jeans with the zipper opening to the left rather than the right? No. Do I care if you choose to wear a skirt to mow your yard or to go the hardware store? No. Why should I care what anyone else wears? How does it affect anyone else what I choose to wear? It shouldn’t at all. Why would it? It’s merely what we choose to wear that we are secure enough to wear and that which is not indecent. Define indecent, I don’t mean something that you personally would feel uncomfortable in as being indecent. I’m talking about not going to jail indecent. Wearing clothing in public is a law. There is no law that says what someone must wear. It wasn’t too long ago it was considered a “sin” for women to wear pants! Now women can wear whatever the hell they like and nobody thinks twice about it. Why do men continue to allow the restrictions on what men can wear? Because we’re scared. Scared that we’ll be labeled as something less than a “real man”. Is a woman any less a woman for wearing men’s boxers, our underwear for Christ’s sake, or men’s shirts, pants or any other men’s wear? No. And why not? I ask you, WTF is the difference? FREE WILLIE!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I wear kilts whenever I can.They are the most practical garment ever invented.
    A man who wears one is intelligent and confident, a man and a half!

    ReplyDelete

Any anonymous comments with links will be rejected.