This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fashion High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

I don't know how common the term "squaw skirt" is but since squaw is a slur, particularly when referencing indigenous North American women (which appears to be the case when talking about skirts), I feel like an alternate name for that style of skirt should be used. Given that the description already include an alternative name (fiesta skirt), should that be used instead? Should the term "squaw skirt" be removed entirely or simply be switched into the location where "fiesta skirt" is now? If the latter makes sense (e.g. if "squaw skirt" really is a popular term for that style), I argue that a link to the article for squaw should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.154.30.116 (talk) 13:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can also mean: verb verb: skirt; 3rd person present: skirts; past tense: skirted; past participle: skirted; gerund or present participle: skirting

   1.go round or past the edge of.
   2. attempt to ignore; avoid dealing with.

Reference http://www.dictionary.com/browse/skirt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.79.203.111 (talk) 13:40, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, this information cam be found on the skirt page at Wiktionary... Mabalu (talk) 13:59, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The idea of skirts seems perverse and somewhat sexist. Shouldn't there be more mention of where the idea of women wearing skirts began? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.201.90 (talk) 22:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Originally everyone wore skirts, not just women. I don't think women would agreed with you that skirts are perverse. A skirt implies a priviledged status, that the wearer is above manual labor or strenuous physical activity. Any perverse implication was lost a very long time ago. Ashbhorn (talk) 12:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know why in many cultures women traditionally wear skirts instead of pants? Does it have anything to do with womens period? That seems strange, because in that case I think pants are more hygienic. I once read that it is easier for men to rape woman wearing a skirt, so it is about men controlling women. I hope that has nothing to do with it?

You need to get out more. Carissa.cool (talk) 17:09, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell is going on? Sioraf (talk) 04:28, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this section as it made all sorts of dubious assertions with out any verification that they represent the balanced opinions of experts in the subject. These claims need sources that show they are suitable content for an encyclopedia article on skirts before going in the article. -- SiobhanHansa 15:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article says, "Outside the U.S., however, higher-status women (judges, cabinet ministers, physicians, corporate executives etc.) generally avoid wearing trousers in public." The dress article says, "Outside the U.S., higher-status women (judges, cabinet ministers, physicians, corporate executives et al.) generally avoid wearing trousers in public." Really? This might be right for Eastern Europe, but with Western Europe and the US compared, I experienced it just the other way round. A number of European high rank European politicians (Angela Merkel and most female members of the cabinet; the most female minsters in France and Spain), all female physicians I know, and also the female advocates I know don't follow the traditional clothing rules; unless they're attending a prom. But in America, I experienced that the most did. So I consider the sentence to be POV, if not wrong. --Derbeobachter (talk) 22:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Outside the US" is hardly limited to Western Europe. Maybe the phrase should say outside Western culture. OR, the phrase might be altered to more clearly define "public" because I get the sense they mean "on official business." But even in the U.S. women are criticized for wearing trousers in too public an environment, lets recall Hillary Clinton and the pantsuit debacle. Ashbhorn (talk) 12:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the article: "The kilt is not a skirt but an historic Gaelic and Celtic garment..." I'm sorry, but the kilt is quite clearly a skirt; the main article on kilts even says so. Is there any reason not to axe the "not a skirt but" bit? Mr.aluminumsiding (talk) 15:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe neither kilts nor sarongs fit the technical definition of a skirt because they are wrapped over rather than being permanently sewn at the side. The kilt wording you quote though seems to imply it's not a skirt because it's old and "noble" which is neither true nor appropriate. I'm not certain of my definition - but either way we ought to make the article internally consistent. -- SiobhanHansa 15:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody please fix this sentence:

Bell-shaped skirt, eponymous to its namesake.

Unless this skirt is named after the inventor of the telephone, it's neither eponymous nor anything to do with a "namesake". This is simply someone trying to show off with a few big words, who doesn't have any idea what s/he's talking about. 68.125.167.161 (talk) 08:32, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In many books and films there are references to Italian soldiers wearing skirt like clothes also Greek soldiers wore those clothes. --82.134.154.25 (talk) 18:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The skirts are going decline,but in this article,I doesn't found any part about the declining.First,in the 19th century,dresses and skirts was the only underwear for women,but now,it's going unpopular.I think there's needed a decline part in the clothes navbox,containing the skirt and the dress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.223.213.145 (talk) 19:31, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the section on Legwear and footwear from version 466895236 as irrelevant, and because the description is highly myopic, restricting itself to current fads among women of a single age cohort in a single time and place. This is an encylopedia, not a fashion magazine or how-to article aimed at young women of a particular time and place.

Is this how Japanese women over 65 dress? Business women in France? Goths in Sydney? Is this about how women of the small landed gentry in early 19th century Britain dressed? No—this is about a shopping fad, and is limited primarily to a particular age group of a particular race and socio-economic class, in one country, in the late 2010s (and not to the woman in the picture) and as such, doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.

Conceivably some of this stuff could be added back in in a more general way as part of a historical section explaining how legwear has changed over time, and in different parts of the world. Even if the objections above could be dealt with, it's not clear that the section belongs at all in an article about skirts. Why not a section on belts, tops, or handbags with skirts? More likely, a legwear section is simply not appropriate here. Such a topic, if relevant at all for an encyclopedia, should be dealt with in a different article elsewhere. Mathglot (talk) 22:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Controversy section is very stitled and disconnected with no references, despite quotes being used. Just makes it hard to read is all. 12.19.152.243 (talk) 05:17, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see the word "stitled" above, and I wonder whether "stilted" was intended. There also seems a very Western Fashion bias, which is probably unavoidable, given the power of the fashion lobby. (Ptolemy)

In "Fads & fashions," we read:

Trouser skirt or cullotte, a straight skirt with the part above the hips tailored like men's trousers, with belt loops, pockets, and fly front.

This seems inaccurate. Specifically, a trouser skirt may be as described here, but culottes (one l, and ending in s) are simply wide-leg pants that resemble a skirt, at least on first glance. A trouser skirt is, if anything, much the opposite. 108.246.206.139 (talk) 06:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do women wear trouser and men don't wear skirt Babatunde Feranmi (talk) 21:45, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The main image is an apron, not a skirt. Do we have consensus to change it to something more appropriate? USchick (talk) 14:04, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I knew more about the subject; I only wanted to know whether tiered skirts were a Spanish contribution, or an Indian contribution. The ones I have seen were usually constructed with very soft fabric (so called Madras fabric), but I believe I have seen flamenco dresses being constructed similarly: the skirt is build in panels, probably portions of cones, sewn together along the circular edges, with a shaped waist. This seems a distinct enough design to be admitted into the list of different sorts of skirt. (Ptolemy)

how can you wear a skirt and a skort at same time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anayguy (talk • contribs) 20:31, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]