I didn't realize when I posted the Gearjunkie.com article about lumbersexuals how big of a thing it was about to become. I didn't realize that it has been written about in Cosmo, Buzzfeed, and many others. I didn't realize that the term Lumbersexuals was coined by Tom Puzak at GearJunkie - despite what urban dictionary says.
When I posted it on Facebook - I commented that I was too busy working in the outdoors, to work at looking like I work in the outdoors! - I had no idea that it would become my most viewed post on Facebook this year!
Tom has written a followup post over at gear junkie retelling the crazy growth. It is quite the story.
The reason that I didn't notice any of this going on around me is how much I have been working. I am in the process of helping to open a new outdoor education market for a large company. It is interesting, and has been keeping me very busy at NOT kayaking. I am even struggling coming up with items for the annual shopping list!
But back to lumbersexuals. I know many people that dress like that for many reasons. None of them are lumberjacks, though they are all extremely active in the outdoors. We used to use the phrase - though it never got picked up into a wider vernacular - Patagoniacs. For some reason I think when you add the suffix 'sexual' it skews the meaning into something vaguely odd... I am not sure how to describe it. Maybe they should be called Plaidiacs?
Literally decades ago, I was in a conversation with someone - I lived in Manhattan at the time - we were discussing 'types', like metrosexuals, and I said I didn't think I really had a type. She said "oh you are the mountain dude!" I wasn't wearing - nor have I ever worn - plaid.
I think if you are applying the lumbersexual title to people who are seeking out this look, it is probably okay. But I think if you wore plaid before this craze, and wore it because it was warm, durable, and sort of inexpensive, to still be called a lumbersexual is a little insulting.
But maybe we just don't need quite so many titles.