In this episode of Cubs Out Loud, the guys take some time to look at some of your feedback! That’s right! Thanks to the listeners, the cubs are able to dedicate a whole episode to what you all wish to say to them.
What’s Going On?
- Jeff: 3 Down, 21 to go
- Damon: OT/Interview
- Chester: End of roadtrip, soulsearching
- Gary: Changing Seasons
- Jeffrey Boan
- BEAR Bigass
- AVidahl: Grrr!
- Mark L
- Chris Bulk
It’s a COL Entourage feedback show!
Pvt msg to Chester:
Cubs out loud is back. Great. Same cast or some new members? (I replied)
Welcome to the group! How did you come to get involved? There wasn’t much talk of the show lately on this site but enjoyed listening to all the guys get together and talk about things. Does the group ever meet in person for events?
Posted 1 month ago re: COL380 Power Hour 4
This one was definitely worth the watch on YouTube. The shirtless eye candy wasn’t available on my podcast audio. ;P
Posted 2 months ago re: COL374: Bear Origins
Highly recommend listening to at least 374 if you’re not a regular listener. It’s really good. I laughed, I cried, I got a semi. Thanks for recording it!
Posted 3 months ago COL372: LTAS: The DL Deal
Really loved this episode! As someone who is one of the (mostly) D/L guys, it was good to hear more from the other side of the coin. Also really glad you touched on the type of D/L guys who aren’t “out” about being into chubs or bears, even if they’re otherwise out as gay. It’s one of my pet peeves!
Keep up the great work!
Posted 4 months ago re: COL367 Bear Issues….?
Loved this episode – thanks!
Email from Tony B.
Gary recently told me online that I was mentioned in the latest episode. I admit I hadn’t listened since his adventures at Claw, simply haven’t had time. I did subscribe to the Youtube channel, but didn’t get any further.
But the latest episode appears to not be working, so I listened to 383 and wanted to chime in.
Here in St. Louis, myself and another bear, started a new type of bear club back in 2002. “The Bears of St. Louis” or BOSL for short. The main local bear club (Show Me Bears) is based out of a bar and I’d
wager 99% of its events are held at the bar. So we started our club with the intent of NOT being bar based. This was two-fold. First, there was no overlap with the existing club, so we wouldn’t “steal members”, but second, it could grab a new audience.
And it did.
We had a *LOT* of college-aged involvement which is rare of standard bear clubs.
Their participation was because a lot of school-based LGBT clubs are geared more towards visibility and (at the time) equal rights and not so much for individuals tastes. So as people interested in bears, they didn’t feel at home there. They weren’t ignored, but the posters didn’t have muscle bears or hairy men, they were gay icons and “pretty boys”, not the gruff kind of men they found interest in.
BUT… we also had one 16 year old attend a potluck of ours, WITH his father. Sadly he didn’t come back. Not because of anything wrong, per se. Basically his father was a bear, just a straight one, and so everyone chatted with him. The young guy felt distanced because not only was his father getting all the attention (worst thing that could happen for a youth) but he wasn’t getting anyone hitting on him, and he was frustrated. I explained that part of it was because his father hit a lot of people’s interests and that he was still “dangerous” being still too young for most guys to associate with too much. The father loved the fact that his expectations were wrong. He assumed we’d be stereotypical gays and instead found himself standing around a BBQ pit with a beer in hand talking about sports… with a couple who had been together for 10+ years. So I’m certain we helped him adjust a little better in regards to his son. 🙂
But with most consent laws being 17 or 18 (depending on state), I can see where the 18 year old is the line, but for the most part, every run I’ve been to has enforced a 21-year or older requirement on their applications. And while it sucks, a lot of times it is because of the venues that the events are hosted at. (Bars, hotels, van/buses, etc.)
There is a need for groups like this. Sadly our group fell apart as it wasn’t designed to be anything more than a social group, so there was no real power structure in place and by 2004, it was gone. Was an amazing two years though. 🙂
One thing I’ll mention that our group also had in participation… Recovering alcoholics.
I never anticipated that, but by not doing events at the bar and providing non-bar based activities, we had a lot of participation from people who had to avoid alcohol.
Another group it attracted and I half-expected this… Couples.
Couples don’t tend to hit the bars a lot as the constant barrage of flirting, drunken gropes, etc, can be a bit much. But for a non-sexualized bear club, there was a lot of couples interested in coming to events.
So there is a market for non-bar based clubs. I know that’s a diversion off the 18-21 year old topic, but I wanted to mention some other groups that get overlooked by the current organizations out there.
I like the phrase “Bi-Now, Gay-Later”, very cute.
So, I dated a Bisexual Poly man, in a gay monogamous relationship (which became a triad) and it ended roughly a year after we started. He is currently married to a woman. I get asked how I feel about that and my comment is always “The only thing I’m upset about is that I didn’t get a damned invite to the wedding!”
Sexuality is fluid. I know a bisexual man who loves skinny women with huge boobs and big men (presumeably with moobs). I found it fascinating to hear him describe it all. But it is who he is.
I myself identify as gay, but I have seen women who I’d have sex with… Probably just morbid curiosity, but I could. I think. Maybe. *shrug* No real interest in finding out though. (And don’t tell my mother, or it’ll rekindle her questions about when I’m going to have kids. Oi.)
Onto the topic of Leather/BDSM play spaces and Sex/Gender issues:
One thing to point out is that there’s an interesting duality here. Play spaces mean different things to different segments of the Leather/BDSM world.
For the pan-sexual world, sex is one aspect of play, but it isn’t an identifier. The BDSM acts are.
For the gay world, sex *IS* our defining trait. We are gay because we want man-on-man action. Thus it is a focus.
And to me, THAT is where the separation comes in. Pansexual BDSM is about the BDSM, not sex. Gay BDSM is about fetishized sex. Not solely and they both cross paths, but the “what gets people hot” is different.
50 Shades of Grey makes gay leathermen giggle with how “quaint” it is. But for women, it’s amazing. By the same token, women who watch gay BDSM videos, they want the raw animal nature of it, the power exchange, the testosterone dripping during the scene…
Can a crossover happen at an event? That gets complicated, especially when it comes to the law. Because straight sex can create children… how would an event handle that? But I’m sure it could happen (and probably does, just not publically known.)
As such, most of the pansexual events I’ve seen are BDSM only, sex back in your room. While most gay events are BDSM mainly, but sex might happen, so be prepared.
Keep in mind, this is no different than bars. How many straight bars have a “back room”? Yet that was a mainstay in the gay bar scene for decades (and still exists in some areas).
Forced bisexuality in BDSM:
I disagree with the topic brought up that a straight couple, the man might force the woman to have sex with another woman…
There is ALWAYS a choice in BDSM. Even slaves CAN say no. (They might not like the consequences, but they can.)
And remember, pansexual BDSM is rarely about sex and more about the BDSM itself. So yes, a Dom male may force a sub female to “assist” with another sub female, but rarely would he force them into sex (unless that was negotiated as a possibility, etc.) and frankly, most Dom males would much prefer something more along the lines of binding one while having sex with the other and forcing the other to watch, much as many Dom males with two male subs would… The BDSM aspect is the same either way.
The problem we see is that as gay men, we don’t distinguish sex from BDSM. And so we assume a BDSM act between one man and two women would be sexual, but it may not be. Just as we would see three men together and if the only activity that happened was bondage, we’d go “really? Just being tied up? No sex? Damn. What a waste.”
While the acts of BDSM are the same either way, one is more of sensuality and heightening arousal (pansexual) while the other (gay) is much more focused on the complete action from start to finish.
And again, is that fixed? Not at all. I’ve seen pansexual scenes that were to completion and I’ve been in gay scenes that involved no sex. But we tend to drift to categorize based on what we like… and we have to watch out for that assumption.
Just my thoughts.
Great episode and look forward to the next one. (Soooooo nervous about how I got brought up. Hehe…)
I’ll Tumbl For You: