I have mixed feelings about this discussion. I'm old enough to have been in on the bear movement when it and Bear Magazine were getting started. The models (like the iconic Jack Radcliff) were originally hairy and a bit overweight. I like to think of it as a bit soft around the middle. It was more about the hair and the non-twinkness than anything else. There weren't any models who's waists were bigger than their chests in the early years. Over the years, it has grown into something that's all about weight and poundage. It has more in common with Mirth and Girth and many guys who call themselves bears are completely hairless. This isn't what it started out to be, and as a smaller guy I'm frequently frustrated at being on the outside because I'm "not big enough". I've been told so to my face many times. I do NOT like the term "chaser", which sounds somehow desperate and needy. I'm frustrated that some people think you have to be morbidly obese to be welcomed and to fit in.
On the other hand, I don't find the weightlifter musclebears currently offered up by the mag attractive either. No cuddle value in all that rock hard muscle. On top of it, I've met a few of the models in person, and the mag's photos are so heavily touched up that the guys are barely recognizable as what they really look like. Clint Taylor, for instance, is a handsome bear, but he does NOT have a sixpack or washboard abs. But he does in the magazine. I once overheard some guys at a BearFilms event telling him he wasn't big enough to call himself a bear. And if you're reading this, Clint. I love you just the way you are!! WOOF!