We all use stereotypes. Every single one of us, every single day. For example, someone at a restaurant hands you something in glass that is liquid and perfectly clear, has no aroma and no fizz. You assume that it is water based on your stereotypes of the world. Some stereotypes are useful; some are harmful.
One particular stereotype out there concerns our hobby, my friends. For the purposes of context, take a look at this picture:
This is clearly a phenomenal photograph displaying a pipe smoker who has many stories to tell. However, it is also the image that most people get when they imagine pipe smokers. This is the pipe smoker stereotype, specifically a white man over the age of fifty-five (if only he would have had tweed on!). In fact, this stereotype was recently mentioned on a pipe forum that I frequent. Its validity was questioned, along with whether or not it was a helpful stereotype and, if not, what can be done about it.
This stereotype does not actively work towards changing the demographic of pipe smoking, which is a necessity if pipe smoking is to survive. What we need is a stereotype that moves us progressively forward.
In an attempt to break that stereotype, some websites have started displaying pictures of younger women smoking pipes, some professionally staged and others casual self-portraits. In fact, there is an entire blog devoted to this.
As a younger pipe smoker – despite meeting two out of three of the above mentioned features – I feel that I should do my part to reduce the prevalence of that stereotype. Also, I asked a number of people who have read my blog what they would like to see more of. The overwhelming answer? College age ladies smoking pipes.
I wanted to find a way to do both. But how? It would be easy to get my friends to puff on a pipe, but that would not be the same. I wanted to display a young lady who actually smoked a pipe and show her smoking and enjoying herself.
Thanks to this particular young woman, I get to kill two birds with one stone!
Allow me first to apologize for my not-so-fantastic photography skills. I can only assure you that the real life thing is much better looking that the photos reveal.
I also feel obligated to mention that all I did was take the pictures. I did not tell the model what to wear or how to pose, but rather to simply sit and enjoy her pipe. The photo session took place immediately after she returned from work at a Scottish pub (thus the plaid skirt).
Now, with no further ado, allow me to introduce our first model: Lauren Ewart, currently in her third year of majoring in English Literature and minoring in Psychology, who is smoking both an IMP Meerschaum (which some of you might recognize) and a Peterson Prince Churchwarden.
Lauren told me before the photo session started about how much she used to hate tobacco products of all kinds. “Cigarettes did a lot of damage to my family,” she says, “and I just associated all tobacco with that same harmful effect. Eventually, though, one of my closest friends (now my boyfriend) started smoking a pipe and told me about all the research that he had done about them. Once I did the research on my own and tried my first pipe, I knew that it was something different and something that I enjoyed immensely.
“Initially, I did my research to learn more about something that interested my boyfriend. After doing that for a while, I started doing the research for my own enjoyment. I love the art of pipes, the history, the connection to the past. The pleasure of smoking a delicious aromatic is just the icing on the cake!”
Lauren is currently enjoying some Mac Baren’s Honey and Chocolate from an IMP Meerschaum freehand. As you can tell, that meerschaum is starting to color nicely after many smoking sessions!
Sipping the same pipe and tobacco while reclining in a leather chair. There really is nothing more relaxing than a pipe and leather chair after a long night of work!
Lauren is clearly appreciating her evening smoke.
Taking a break from puffing. I think she just now remembered that I was there…
My personal favorite picture. Lauren reclines with a Peterson churchwarden. I love the coloration of this picture and the pose, as I feel that it accentuates the pipe and the experience of relaxing with a good smoke.
***
This is just the first in this series. I plan on continuing to find more ladies of all ages who smoke pipes and other people who enjoy pipes, regardless of any distinguishing features, in an attempt to break the stereotypes of the age, gender, and race of pipe smokers. Look for Lauren to make a return appearance describing how she became interested in pipes and how she came to own her first pipe.
The goal for the “Transforming Stereotypes” series is to find those who do not necessarily fit into the cliche image of a pipe smoker and to tell their story. Whether this means a young man, an older woman, or just someone of a different ethnicity, I hope to see the catalogue of experiences grow to include those from all walks of life, so long as they love pipes. It is, after all, what we have in common that brings us together.
Thanks for stopping by and I hope you enjoyed.
Cheers,
Ethan ‘thefoolish’ Brandt
This was a great read. I love the idea of bringing pipes to a younger crowd and changing how we think about them.
As the creator of the poster promoting bad stereotyping of pipe smokers – as a gift to our hobby, I might add – I thought I might add a few facts here. First, a Health and Human Services study (supported by the US Census) of pipe-smokers in North America revealed that better than 90% of pipe smokers are indeed white males over 55. So, the bad stereotype is, in fact, the truth which I personally think is neither harmful nor beneficial. It is what it is. I think I’ve met six women pipe smokers over the last decade, assuming I’m counting correctly. They are so unrepresentative of the pipe smoking community that such a representation beggars belief. I never imagined that I would read criticism of my gift to pipe smokers here, but my mother once told me that no good deed goes unpunished.
Neill,
As I said in the blog, I was not insulting your gift. In fact, I stated that it was a great poster that promoted our hobby well. What I said was that there was a controversy stirred up on a forum concerning the poster, as you might well remember.
I was in no way implying that you are the creator of the stereotype or that your gift was doing something detrimental to the hobby. I am appreciative of your photographic talent and your offering aimed at promoting our hobby.
I was simply using the discussion that was spurred by this image as a springboard for further discussion.
I did not intend to offend, but this is an issue that was brought up previously by others. I attempted to make it very clear that “this post is not intended to slam this particular poster, but rather the widespread impression that pipe smokers are only white men above the age of fifty. The purpose of the use of this poster is to show where the initial conversation on this topic started, not to say that there is anything wrong or problematic about this poster specifically.” (Emphasis added) Not only that, but I devoted three paragraphs to praising the poster and never said a bad word about it. I am having difficulty seeing where I offended…
If it was not clear in the post itself, I hope I have now made it painfully clear that I am in no way slamming you or your gift. Rather, I was building further off of a previous conversation that the poster spawned. In a further attempt to clarify this, I have eliminated the pop-culture reference of “Breaking Bad” and changed it to “Transforming”. Damn those buzz-words.
Cheers,
Ethan
Given the overwhelming census data supporting the “stereotype” in the poster, one must conclude that it is accurate. It was a marketing piece targeted based on good demographic research.
This attempt to “replace” a stereotype based on facts with one based on some ideal or wishful thinking with no basis in reality is in fact doublespeak and the promotion of falsehood. It would be great if lots of sultry co-eds all over the country took up pipe smoking, but in reality that has not happened.
The poster presents an accurate stereotype, properly targeted to the actual market for which it was intended and what you ask for is nothing but a pipe dream.
In light of the strong feelings that you witnessed elsewhere, that you would continue to assail the utility and accuracy of this gift to the pipe community, leaves me bewildered and frankly a bit steamed…but then again I am a white guy over 50 so what do I know?
If your point was so important to make, perhaps a better example could have been found that would not have run the risk of offending friends and supporters.
Richard,
The census data cannot be denied, though I don’t think 90% is quite right. However, as many have said, one the goals of IPSD and the pipe-community as a whole is to expand the audience. Thus, representing the average demographic should not be the only goal.
As for the statement that I was assailing “the utility and accuracy of this gift to the pipe community”, that seems to misrepresent my statements and intentions. I clearly said that the poster was fantastic artistically and did a great job advertising International Pipe Smoking Day. Thus, I have actually complimented the utility of the gift.
Additionally, I stated that my intention was not to insult the poster, but rather to provide context for where this overarching discussion started.
I certainly have no desire to offend people unnecessarily, but I feel that mountains may be seen where there are nothing but molehills.
Attempting to improve our hobby and the understanding that others have of those who smoke pipes is something that I would consider positive. Having discussions is the first step in that aim. There was no animosity contained within this post and I am slightly befuddled at the response.
Here are the facts: when that picture was posted on a particular forum, there was a negative lashback because of the concern that it did not portray the pipe smoking community in the most effective of ways. This is not a slam on the person who made it or the poster itself, but rather a statement of fact: there was a lashback. Mentioning the fact that there was a particular reaction is not a negative comment, it is a fact.
Further, I never said a negative word about the poster or the creator. I would think that three full paragraphs of compliments and prefacing would be more than enough to explain the intention.
Cheers,
Ethan
I’m going to quote from the blog post once more:
“Now, this is a great poster, with obvious fantastic photography skills being utilized and managing to capture the blissful experience that is pipe smoking. However, this poster managed to cause a bit of a disturbance when it first appeared on a pipe-smoking forum that I frequent.
The disagreement wasn’t because it didn’t do an excellent job promoting our holiday, as it, in fact, is a wonderful piece displaying a happy pipe smoker and a well-loved pipe, but rather because many felt that it did not capture the pipe-smoking community as well as it might have.
Let me be clear: this post is not intended to slam this particular poster, but rather the widespread impression that pipe smokers are only white men above the age of fifty. The purpose of the use of this poster is to show where the initial conversation on this topic started, not to say that there is anything wrong or problematic about this poster specifically.”
Now, this is the only time in the entire post that the poster is mentioned. Let’s see what positive words were used: “great”, “fantastic”, “blissful”, “excellent”, “wonderful”. Here are the negative words: “disturbance”, “disagreement”. To me, it appears that one significantly outweighs the other.
Again, sometimes molehills look like mountains.
I can only hope that I have managed to once more clarify this issue.
Cheers,
Ethan
Holy over-reaction, Batman!
With all due respect to Richard and Neil, it seems like you have taken this whole thing a little out of context and way out of proportion.
The OP seems to go out of his way to praise the poster, much more than would be expected of anyone simply trying to insult something. He then says that the post is not intended to “slam the poster”. Looks pretty clear to me.
I’m not 100% sure why you two are getting so worked up over this, but I really enjoyed the post.
Keep it up!
TF
Let me get this clear in my mind.
1) Neill takes a pretty sweet picture of someone smoking a pipe and turns it into a promotional poster, which he then puts up on the internet.
2) People on a smoking forum argue about whether Neill’s poster – which is of an older man enjoying his pipe – promotes the stereotype that pipes are a thing for old men.
3) People on that forum decide that the best way to change how the pipe smoking demographic is perceived is to change the demographic make-up of pipe smokers, and the best way to change the demographic make-up of pipe smokers is by changing the way pipes and pipe smoking are portrayed. Thus the pipe-smoking market is widened.
4) Ethan posts a blog entry that attempts to pipes and pipe smokers are portrayed can be changed by juxtaposing pipes and pretty ladies.
5) Neill and others take issue with the position that there is something inherently wrong with the original picture.
6) Ethan denies ever putting forward such a position.
… Is that where we stand now?
It seems to me that the disgruntlement here stems from the use of the phrase “Bad Stereotypes.” Upon reading this, Neill apparently understood the phrase either to mean a) this stereotype is inaccurate, or b) holding this stereotype is wrongbad. Richard also seems to have taken this interpretation. But the crucial thing is whether that is the sense the phrase is used in the actual article.
I submit that it is not. As Neill rightly points out, it is patently obvious that the vast, overwhelming majority of pipe smokers are in fact older men. Given the obviousness of this point, the principle of charity (cf., wikipedia) requires that we assume the author also was aware of this fact. So the author clearly doesn’t mean that the stereotype is bad inasmuch as it is inaccurate.
What does he mean then? I refer you to point 3). The author’s stated purpose is to broaden the pipe-smoking demographic, and the stereotype that pipes are for old men is not conducive to that goal. In this sense, then, the stereotype – while accurate! – is dileterious to the goal; i.e., it is bad.
To quote from the article: “This stereotype does not actively work towards changing the demographic of pipe smoking, which is a necessity if pipe smoking is to survive. What we need is a stereotype that moves us progressively forward.”
Can I have a link to the survey that says 90% of pipe smokers are over 55, that can’t be accurate, are you sure you read that right, Neill?
Most people I see at shows, are older yes, but I wound’t say 9/10 over 50. I can also say most of my customers are under 50, way under. I’ll see if I can dig up some stats… Not sure how I’ll find any though.
Again, my personal experience is such a small sample but 90% seems really hgih.
The information of this survey puts the numbers a little differently:
http://pipesmagazine.com/Pipe-Smoker-Survey-2010.pdf
This one puts it at around 60% are over the age of 55, while 40% are under.
Admittedly, this is a smaller survey.
Here’s some more information. Once again, this is a small sample, but here is the average age of those who follow Quality Briar on Facebook. Again, small sample size, but worth noting:
About 65% of them are under the age of 50.
I will keep searching. Knowledge is power!
How unfortunate. I’m going to be direct and blunt. Ethan, you make a good point about stereotypes. But regardless of all of the complimentary things you said about Neill’s poster, your use of it to make your point was insensitive and in poor taste. While your central goal might not have been to deliver an insult, the fact is that you have. Your follow up comments make it even worse. Come on. It seems that rather than to defend a glaring example of bad judgment, a humble and simple apology would be much more appropriate and perhaps redemptive.
Scott,
I agree in that it truly is unfortunate.
As I said, I never intended to offend. Anyone who knows me can tell you that one of my least favorite things is offending someone without intending to.
There is a great deal of reasons that I feel it is unfortunate. Overall, I am disappointed in the way this turned out.
But I am determined to fix it and put us back on the right track so that we can all move forward.
Simply put, this photo is not crucial enough to the piece to cause such unnecessary strife between people who, I feel, ultimately agree on wanting to encourage the spread of pipes to new demographics. Sometimes, one (read: “I”) must decide the most efficient means of having a conversation, especially through a medium like text, where it is so easy to read a particular intention into something where there was none present. Clearly, my intention was being viewed as hostile, which is certainly was not meant to be in any way. Without first finding common ground, it is impossible to make progress.
I still strongly believe that this conversation needs to be had, concerning the image of pipe smokers held by society and within our own ranks and also how best to spread the enjoyment of pipes to new demographics. But it appears that the conversation is impossible under the current situation, leaving us in a bit of a quagmire. Therefore, and I apologize that I did not do this sooner, in the interest of clearing up any perceived malice and creating an environment where we can work on forwarding our hobby through fruitful discussion and united interests — I think we can all agree that we have a stake in the future of pipe smoking — I have decided to remove the poster. I hope that we can all now move forward to discussing the issue that this piece actually intended address before this ugliness.
Cheers,
Ethan
No appology is needed or will be givin. Ethan didn’t do anything wrong. You guys want to pick on someone pick on me. Neill, Richard and Scott. You’ll be hearing from me today.
The above comments are the reason a younger crowd are not interested in pipe smoking. Who wants to deal with a bunch of grumpy, self important curmudgeons.
IMHO the “old guys” need to grow up.
Well, for the benefit of any other readers who might be wondering what the hell is going on, I just got off the phone with you Nick, we’re fine, and I need a friggin’ smoke and a break from what one of my eighteen year old daughters calls internet drama! And you owe me a beer.
Although I really like the photo, I would agree that displaying that stereotype does nothing for the hobby going-forward. Being a thirty-something, pipe smoking male, it sort of bothers me that pipe smoking is associated with that picture and I believe it’s part of the reason why more cigar smokers don’t give pipes a try.
Joseph,
I agree. I really do like that photo, but it does get slightly annoying to be a college age pipe smoker and always get an odd look when I say that I smoke a pipe, followed by, “Aren’t you a little young to smoke a pipe?”
I’m always tempted to respond: “Aren’t you a little old to be so closed minded?” More often than not, though, I just nod and say, “I’m an old soul.” That tends to satisfy them for a while.
And to EH: I certainly hope this won’t prevent you from trying pipes, if you haven’t already. It’s a wonderful hobby with a great community.
Cheers to all,
Ethan
It’s very interesting to hear some of these views relative to age, beauty, and body image. When I began smoking a pipe, I was an 18 year old college student, and part of what attracted me to it was that I associated it with the image of the serious intellectual, the thinking man. It had nothing to do with age or ethnicity, although my girlfriend’s father, an avid pipe hobbyist and former design professor, was a craggy faced grey bearded white guy about the age that I am now, 56. But if anything, I found his physical aspect appealing.
What interests me here is how strong the negative reaction of some members of the “younger crowd” has been to a craggy faced older white man smoking a pipe, and how powerfully they are repelled by that image. We live in a culture where I think it’s safe to say that the majority of people are heavily influenced by a desire for relative youth and somewhat idealized physical beauty. People want to emulate in their own appearance and behavior what they see as desirable. The near obsession with image, and the sometimes rancorous debate it has apparently sparked here, is fascinating. It makes me wonder what’s really under it all.
Wow! I am dumbfounded. Personally I don’t give a hoot how pipe smokers are percieved by the wider society. I smoke a pipe throughout the day because I am a pipe smoker. Period. I smoke in private and I smoke in public. I also smoke in the can. If someone has a problem with it, they can contact my lawyer. Really, I could care less what others think of me and my pipe. Life is short enough as it is to worry about what the neighbors think. Get a life. Smoke a pipe. And let’s try not to think too deeply about it. Eh?
Hey, Kashmir,
I totally see where you’re coming from and in a lot of cases I agree. Don’t like that I smoke a pipe? Too bad.
But let me ask you a couple questions, if I may. Given recent legislation aimed at tobacco products, including, but not limited to, pipe tobacco, do you think that the way pipe smokers are perceived by the wider society will play a role in how many laws are made targeting pipes?
Also, do you think the perception of what a pipe smoker is plays a role in whether someone new tries a pipe?
I am simply curious as to what you think.
Thanks for the comment!
Cheers,
Ethan
Hi Ethan, I have mixed views on whether it is my role to recruit new members to pipe smoking. I can see the sense of it from an economic standpoint – driven as it is by advertising. But, I am much more of a “live & let live” type of character. I do however have a prepared speech for those who would argue against pipe smoking, and that is the following:
Let’s test your IQ on the World History of the 20th Century. Run your eyes down this list of names and see how many you recognize. Collectively, I would argue, these men actually made the 20th Century, both literally and figuratively. To a man, all avid pipe smokes, each and every one. Moreover, many lived well beyond the average lifespan of their day, many passing in their mid- to late-eighties. We current tobacco pipe smokers actually represent the historical legacy of the community of world pipe smokers, a community which, in the not too distant past, encompassed some 40% of the adult males in the United States. Lest it not be forgotten, these anonymous pipe smokers were our grandfathers. Although far fewer in number today, we nevertheless still hold the candle to the memory of these men and the deeds they accomplished, with, of course, pipe in hand:
Albert Einstein, Mark Twain, William Faulkner, John Steinbeck, Norman Rockwell, Orson Wells, JRR Tolkein, Douglas MacArthur, Admiral Arleigh Burke, Stanley Baldwin, Neville Chamberlain, Bing Crosby, President Gerald Ford, Carl Sandburg, Harold Macmillan, Konrad Lorenz, Errol Flynn, Edgar Rice Burroughs, John D. MacDonald, Warner Baxter, Thomas Selfridge, Charles Nelson Reilly, Ossip Zadkine, , Max Frisch, , Paul Casals, Jack Lynch, Patrick Moore, Anthony Hulme, Ronald Colman, Alexander Kent, Jacques Brel, Lino Ventura, Alfred Wainwright, Rudolph Bultmann, Philippe Sollers, Jean Gabin, Leo Malet, G.E. Moore, Gilbert Ryle, Edmund Husserl, J.L. Austin, Lalo Schifrin, James Whitmore, Anthony Quayle, Ralph Richardson, Bernard Grebanier, Jean-Paul Sartre, Stanley Holloway, , Carl Jung, Paul Kruger, Curd Jurgens, Gerard Walschap, Trevor Howard, Tony Benn, Rod Hull, Trevor Baylis, Joss Ackland, Frank Muir, Manny Shinwell, Jack Hargreaves, Warren Mitchell, Rupert Davies, Russ Abbot, Van Gordon Sauter, Walter Cronkite, Robert Fulghum, Milorad Pavić, Glenn Ford, Erwin Shrodinger, Moustapha Akkad, Evelyn Waugh, Harold Wilson, Bertrand Russell, Alf Landon, Edgar Buchanan, Dean Jagger, Edward G. Robinson, Rudyard Kipling, Aaron Spelling, P.G. Wodehouse, Allen Dulles, Otto Klemperer, Henry Fonda, Lee Van Cleef, Jack Lemmon, Peter Cushing, Barry Fitzgerald, Hume Cronyn, Graham Chapman, Nigel Bruce, Bennet Cerf, Raymond Chandler, Alexander Graham Bell, Arthur Frank, Richard E. Byrd, Gregory Peck, Albert King, Clarence “Gatemouth” Brown, Edward Abbey, Juan Trippe, Frank Sinatra, General George S. Patton, Jacques Derrida, Hurbert Hoover, Sid James, Fred Trueman, Vincent Schiavelli, Eric Morecambe, Stephen Fry, Fred Thompson, Roscoe Dickinson, Guy N. Smith, Gunter Grass, Sean O’Casey, A.A. Milne, Sir Compton Mackenzie, Laurie Lee, W. Somerset Maugham, J.B. Priestly, Andre Dubus, Gordon Parks, F.A. Mitchell-Hedges, W.W. Denslow, William Conrad, William Gillette, Edwin Hubble, Rober Oppenheimer, Niels Bohr, Robert Young, Clark Gable, Fred MacMurray, Ralph Bellamy, Cary Grant, David Ogilvy, Sir Winston Churchill, Kind George VI, Arthur Miller, Ernest Hemingway, John Ford, Shelby Foote, Herschel Burke Gilbert, Thomas Johnston Taylor, Theodor Geisel (Dr. Seuss), Sir John Mills, Owen Barfield, Alan Christopher “Al” Deere, Elliot Harold Paul, Healey Willan, Harold Tucker Webster.
Eric,
What a list! Some of my favorite human beings are on that list. I certainly hope you didn’t type it by hand!
Cheers,
Ethan
I’ve posted a thread on this subject on another forum:
http://www.smokersforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=104558
Cheers,
I have a secretary.
I’m in the demographic for the >90% of pipe smokers, at least since last October 25. But I started smoking pipes over 35 years ago, meaning I didn’t fit the stereotype for most of my life thus far. I know women who smoke pipes, men who smoke pipes, kids who smoke pipes. Gay, straight, and everything in between. White, Black, Asian – I wouldn’t be surprised to meet a pipe-smoking alien if there are aliens! Many stereotypes are based in some aspect of the fact, yet there are always exceptions to the stereotype. In my opinion it is the exceptions that we want to win over IF our intent is to spread our passion to others.
I would be thrilled to become a minority among pipe smokers!
John – I am displaying my geekdom here but I can say with certainty that the first Doctor Who (William Hartnell) was seen on occasion contemplating with pipe in hand. I’m not sure if this counts since I’m fairly sure that Hartnell was not an alien, but the good Doctor certainly is……. although he may fit into the other stereotype since at last count he’s well over 900 years old.
Warren,
That is a fantastic reference. I cannot describe how huge the smile on my face is right now.
Cheers,
Ethan
I have looked with great interest at what the Wall Street Journal referred to as (paraphrasing) the younger pipe smoker phenomenon. College age men are taking up the pipe at greatest rates since the early 60′s (albeit they still represent an extreme minority in the collegiate body as a whole). Of particular fascination to me, The WSJ reported that, for the first time in the annals, the overwhelming majority of the men are doing so *without* emulating a parental archetype (neither a father, grandfather, or favored professor were a pipe smoker).
Why are these young academics taking up the briar? The second biggest reason cited was the perception that pipe smoking was the safest method of tobacco enjoyment. The first? Smoking a pipe promotes a sense of individualism and is an enjoyable manner in which to further stand out from the crowd.
Looking at the starting ages/reasons given for taking up the pipe by many of this blog’s respondents (I started at 16, with no archetype to emulate), the spirit of ‘not following the sheep’ tends to leap out at me. I find it a bit comforting to know that the flame of individualism that ignited the interest in pipes for many of us remains (at least) a spark in Generation Z.
(meds wear off)
Where were we? Oh! Stereotypes. I have no pony in this race, but a couple of opinions.
I think the OP is spot-on regarding the image that pops into (what passes for) the mind of the general populace, when they hear ‘pipe smoker’. If you had ten bucks for every time that someone smelled your tobacco, and commented ‘Mmm… that takes me back to my father/grandfather’, you could buy one damned fine pipe, couldn’t you?
Personally, I find Neill’s poster delightful and comforting. When I first saw the art, the emotional impact that passed closest to a stereotype was an impression of wisdom, and an all-too-rare maverick individualism.
Ending my straddle, before having to explain an infestation of wood mites in my crotch to my girlfriend, I don’t think for a second that the OP intended any slight in his use of Neill’s gift as an example of the archetype of the pipe smoker in the public’s noggin. By the same token, if that poster had been my creation, I would be highly sensitive to my work being associated with a red-flag word on the magnitude of ‘stereotype’. That’s just called being human. Initially small differentials in equatorial oceanic air pressure can develop into hurricanes. Here, the differential between intent and perception developed into a ‘tempest in a teapot’.
About time for a group hug? Come on, hug me! Don’t run away, fellars… !
Best,
Bear
Bear,
That was an extremely well thought out (and extremely entertaining) response. Thank you for it.
Still up for that hug? Just don’t crush me!
Cheers,
Ethan