Definition of BOOR
1: peasant
2: a rude or insensitive person
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boor
Wikipedia explanation of the term, 'Bear':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_(gay_culture)
Bears are heavy-set men and are often characterized as having hairy bodies and facial hair; some are also muscular; some attempt to project an image of rugged masculinity in their grooming and appearance. Some Bears place importance on presenting a hyper masculine image and may shun interaction with, and even disdain, men who exhibit effeminacy. The Bear concept can function as an identity, an affiliation, and there is ongoing debate in bear communities about what constitutes a Bear, however a consensus exists THAT INCLUSION IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE BEAR COMMUNITY.
Bears are almost always gay or bisexual men. Increasingly, transgender or transsexual men (trans men) and those who shun labels for gender and sexuality are also included within bear communities.
Younger or smaller men who identify with bear culture may also be labelled as cubs.
From the GROWLR homepage:
Description
More Bears in more places... GROWLr is the complete mobile app for gay Bears.
What's a Bear? A Bear is a masculine gay man who belongs to a very INCLUSIVE part the gay community. Some are hairy, some are muscular, and some are heavy-set. ...And SOME ARE NONE OF THOSE THINGS. Being a Bear is about being yourself, and being accepted for it, and we are all amazing no matter how we are labeled.
Visit us on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/growlrapp
Or on the web:
http://www.growlrapp.com
Okay, so why does it seem like I am inserting a list of definitions on the origin of the, 'Bear Community'? And what is it with the capitalization and colorized text, especially when the word, 'inclusion' appears?
I'll tell ya...I get frustrated and tired of people who wear the title of, "Bear" as if it was a crucifix, and who, being a 'true believer', insist on dictating to others, who or what is a Bear.
I know, I know, many of you, my faithful readers, will know I've written on this topic before. But, like all blogs, which tend to be screeds on topics and opinions near and dear to the hearts of the authors, THIS DADDY is my blog and I can right about what I want....so THERE!
So what brought this bout of grumpiness on? Sigh, I was on the aforementioned app, "Growlr" this morning, when I received the following, unsolicited IM, "just curious... If your (sic) not into bears or cubs and are looking for the smooth version of an offer (Author's Note: I assume he meant, 'Otter') (which would be known as a seal) then why are you on an app that is specifically (sic) for the BEAR community? You might want to try grinder (Author's Note: I assume he means, 'Grindr')."
Why is it that the Bear community is the only of the gay, 'silos' in which it is expected, no, not expected, required that for 'participation' one must not only BE a Bear, but one must also only desire to f*ck (or for those bottoms out there, be f*cked by) other Bears? To me, this way of thinking is beyond reason.
As I've written before, in most of the other 'silos', opposites are encouraged to participate and to interact with each other. Oh, but not in the Bear community. In my experience, most of those who describe themselves as being Bears, think that being heavyset, older, and hairy is not only typical but required. If this is the case, then these guys clearly (based on the information above) these guys are wrong. And if they don't even know what a Bear is, how in the heck can they call themselves one, let alone dictate to others what being a Bear means?
Being stocky, hairy, older, I clearly fall within the bounds of beardom. So, if being a Bear is all about acceptance and inclusion, shouldn't I be welcome in both the cyber world and real world in locals designated as Bear-friendly? And, if I am welcome, shouldn't those 'opposites' who have an affinity for Bears be welcomed as well? Apparently not. It is narrow-minded to insist that the admirers and friends of Bears can only be and must be other Bears. It makes a mockery of the idea that the Bear community is 'inclusive' when there is major lack of acceptance in that community for those who don't meet some arbitrary standards or think in lock step. That sounds way more, 'exclusive' to me than 'inclusive.'
I chat on many sites, Daddyhunt, Manhunt, Silverdaddies, Adam4Adam, and I use gay 'dating' apps, Grindr, Scruff, Growlr. Yet, it is only on those sites that have a large contingent of Bears where I find folks who feel so free to IM me and berate me for my use, membership, or participation.
I do often get, 'wait, you are fat, hairy, old dude, isn't it hypocritical of you to not find other fat, hairy, old dudes appealing.' But then, if you've read my blog with any regularity, you've read my writings on this question before. While I've been asked that, nobody on any of the sites I regularly visit has ever questioned my presence. They may have questioned my tastes and such, but the mere fact of my presence, never. Personally, I would never dare to do such. It would never dawn on me to dictate to anyone as to which places (cyber or real-world) they should be allowed to visit or in which they should be allowed to participate or socialize. Don't get me wrong, I am just as judgmental and opinionated as the next guy, heck, maybe even more so. For example, I have strict views on what makes a 'Daddy' and what makes a 'boy' or a 'hunter.' But I also make it clear that those are not right with a capital R (i.e., I am not dictating or demanding that others agree with me), I am merely stating what I believe to be true and what is right for ME. That is called an 'opinion.' And opinion I am free to share, but not to inflict upon others or insist they adopt.
If, as the Wikipedia excerpt above states, 'Some Bears place importance on presenting a hyper masculine image...' how 'hyper masculine is it to wilt like a little school girl when someone doesn't feel, act, or behave as arbitrarily required? Is the fact that I don't find fat, hairy, older dudes so threatening? If so, why? And not only why, but how? Like the argument against gay marriage, that somehow by allowing gays to marry it affects those couples in traditional marriages, the thinking seems to be that the fact that some folks don't find fat, hairy, old dudes appealing somehow impacts those who do. This makes no sense whatsoever. To me, being so overly sensitive and doctrinaire in thinking is indicative of a community which espouses acceptance and inclusion but is really of full of self-loathing and dysfunction.
If it neither threatens nor bothers me that someone finds fat, hairy, old dudes appealing (as much as I may not understand how or why they do), then why or how is it threatening to those who do find someone fat, hairy, and older appealing, that some folks don't? Get over it.
At least, that is what THIS DADDY thinks.
No comments:
Post a Comment