The inspiration for the March issue came from the following definition in Webster's Dictionary:
DOMESTICATE: 1. To cause to feel comfortable at home; make domestic. 2. To adopt or make fit for domestic use or life. 3a. To train or adapt (an animal or plant) to live in a human environment and be of use to humans. 3b. To introduce and accustom (an animal or plant) into another region; naturalize. 4. To bring down to the level of the ordinary person.
Sounded appropriate to me. While I've no personal experience, I imagine daddys to be rather demanding. That said, here's an issue chock full of ways a cub can keep his pop pleased. I promise a feature story in the next few days - provided the daily drag doesn't interfere. Please note: we are now distributing in Japan. Hence the barcode on the front cover. I fought and fought it, but alas my financers backed me into a corner. I atleast dressed up what otherwise would be a boring white box. You may recognize him as the Thoughtnot mascot. Speaking of, credit to Oliver for the Nestle Crunch story - way to go O.
Feedback? Fire away!
Just curious about the cover... is that a found photograph or did you actually shoot it?
Posted by: Brad | February 25, 2005 at 08:26 AM
Great! I've been filled with anticipation for days.
Posted by: alexis | February 25, 2005 at 10:45 AM
hello, i just wandered by via linkage on gay.fleshbot.com. i think teen bear = absolutely the best idea ever. seriously. the photo on the march cover is so hot i can barely keep focussed on how awesome the design/typography is. great job all around. love it. get an Official Web Site for it. truly, it rocks so much. if you need a san francisco-based photographer next time you do an article about SF, i'm your guy.
:) matt.
Posted by: mattymatt | February 25, 2005 at 06:47 PM
So how do I get my hands on this?
Posted by: Serge | February 25, 2005 at 09:22 PM
you need to put an actual teen bear on the cover!...not to be ageist but that guy aint a teen
Posted by: kevin | February 25, 2005 at 10:58 PM
is it possible you might post some photos of yourself shirtless?
Posted by: jason | February 25, 2005 at 11:14 PM
I agree with Jason....Tony is adorable.
Posted by: Frank | February 26, 2005 at 08:19 PM
*rolls eyes*
now i dont want to rain on anyone's parade. But technically, if we are breaking scenes up and claiming bears, cubs, bunnies, etc...then its not really logical for you to call a magazine "teen bear." Inside the gay world we live in, bears are considered to be men who are older, and hairy. Ranging from thir 30's and up. (reference to the bear handbook!) Young men who are younger then that are considered cubs. So technically the magazine should be called Teen Cub. The man on the cover looks nothing like ANYONE i knew as a teenager, or related to in any way. He looks like the man i would want to be with now, that i am in my late 20's. Just seems a little misleading to call something that goes against the logic of the gay world. If you want to turn around and claim that this is something new to the gay world and maybe you are trying to start a new genre or new mag or something, then you are gonna get some feedback that resembles what i have said already, cause over all in my opinion you have mad a trendy bear magazine, thats not focused around men, but the grrly things men do...i would like to see what info yall come up about Jay Mcroll, but i have the net for that...
Posted by: YngWoofer | March 03, 2005 at 01:20 PM
YW, I know where you are coming from, I hear it all of the time in the Lonestar. Back in the day (fifteen/twenty years ago), I would have been pissed off if you referred to me as a cub. A bear is a bear is a bear. There are guys in personal ads calling themselves "cubs" and they are in their forties & fifties, so why can't a bear be in his teens and twenties, especially if he has the pelt to go with it.
Also, facial hair makes guys look older. I'm betting that without the beard, the coverguy could pass for 19. When I was 21 & occasionally cleanshaven, I would get carded without fail, but not with a beard.
Posted by: Ted | March 03, 2005 at 11:33 PM
First off, there is no way that guy would pass for 19!
He might get carded, but my ex who was 40 years old, got carded everytime, so that says nothing at all, other then you got exceptions a few times!
Facial hair means nothing in the world today, its just facial hair. A bear by definition in the gay community (AGAIN, reference to the Bear Handbook!)is a OLDER man, heavy or chuncky, that is hairy or very hairy. A cub can be anyone younger then 30 (give or take!), who is chuncky, hairy, not hairy, into that scene. If they are thin, and hairy they arent even considered a bear or cub, they are considered a otter. My whole point is that you seem to have made a magazine that you are trying to apply to a different genre of people, but in doing so, you are giving almost wrong information.
If someone wants to call themselves a cub or a bear, and not be critized (cause lord knows, people in the world pay attention to this sh1t and will continue too forever, its part of being a fag!) for having a label that doesnt follow THAT person at all. Then IN MY OPINION you picked the wrong idea and wrong community to munipulate!
Posted by: Yngwoofer | March 04, 2005 at 11:10 AM
just so everyone knows...i support the magazine regardless cause i am a HUGE BEAR LOVER, everything bear i love, so i cant say that the magazine hasnt drew my attention, i just see it as missing a bit of the fun side that bears bring to the table and it seems to be more about just the normal "gay" bs that every gay mag covers.
Posted by: Yngwoofer | March 04, 2005 at 11:17 AM
Jays win was awesome! Hes so frigging cute, Id love to get him in the sack with me and my boyfriend! hehe. Seriously though, its nice to see chubby boys in a positive light. Theres soo much negativity towards being a chubby person. My boyfriend and I even have started sorta of designing clothes because of him ( okay my boys designing and Im quilsting but still.. )
I cant wait to see what else hes gonna do. :)
Posted by: furrycubjimmy | March 08, 2005 at 11:22 PM
There's nothing wrong with the title "Teen Bear Magazine". 1) It sounds better than "Cub Magazine" 2) the term "cub" has a couple of image problems, mostly because it first conjures up images of baby animals - and gays already have an image problem when it comes to older man/Younger man relationships. 3) Just because there's another word for "Teen Bear" doesn't mean it's necessarily any more correct. Its the difference between "multicolored interconnecting blocks" and "legos". 4) The model is cute as a button.
Posted by: pd711 | March 09, 2005 at 09:59 AM
How do I subscribe?
Posted by: ruggerjohnnyd | June 23, 2005 at 08:31 PM
"Ugh! You're using the wrong labels! UGH! OOH OH OOOH!! It makes me SO MAD! Stop calling me a Cub! I'm not a Cub, damnit, I'm 31 and furry! OOOOH! Mary, make them STOOOOPP!"
Geez people, give it a break.
When you saw the words "Teen Bear" what did you see in your minds eye? Yup, a furry high school kid struggling with the same crap we all did. Oh, except that unlike most of you post-twink furries, this kid looked like his friend's fathers at 13. It happens. Open your mind - just because you can't relate doesn't mean bearshit.
Posted by: Gryph | December 05, 2005 at 10:48 AM
umm, all this classification is so unbelievably outdated -- does anyone truly give a fuck? there's one group that covers you all: geeks.
Posted by: Donna Martin | December 07, 2005 at 06:55 PM