Dan & Phil Part 46: Some kind of a gay backstory

Our two favourite full time internet nerds who never go outside!
Locked
User avatar
Catallena
classy cat lady
classy cat lady
Posts: 3192
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:56 pm
Location: The Netherlands

fancybum wrote:
Catallena wrote:Well then, fuck her. Get better friends Phil. I went digging a bit and found these two gems of fuckery on her Tumblr:
http://nanalew.tumblr.com/post/38742631 ... bertarians

and

http://nanalew.tumblr.com/post/20761969 ... d-liberals

Of course she's a Libertarian, that shitty 'I don't agree with you but won't hate you' attitude about gay marriage is so typical.

Yeah these are old but obviously not much had changed in 2015 sooooo..



(hi i've been away from IDB for a few days because I didn't feel like posting but I'm still lurking)
On one (giant) hand: yeah. On the other (tiny, rubber) hand: uncomfortable noises. Anecdotal oversharing because I'm not extremely busy today in the least, and this is definitely what I should do with a spare few minutes, not other important things I definitely don't need to be doing right now, nope, I'm a responsible person:
I have a friend who is basically this, I've been friends with her for over 10 years, and it's something we've just learned not to talk about. I remember a very uncomfortable car ride with her and another friend years ago where he decided to call out her beliefs out of nowhere (I just sprawled out in the backseat and basically made uncomfortable noises the entire time because I knew it wouldn't go anywhere productive, and it didn't), essentially trying to make her choose her friends over her religion lol, and you can imagine how that went down. The only thing we really learned is it's not just gay people that she 'disagrees' with (or actually: gay people being gay, because if they never act on anything and are genuinely repentant for being the way they are (in thought) then they're a-ok for admittance to the opposite of eternal suffering, so. like. what's the big deal.), it's anybody that isn't her exact religion, which is the only correct one, that she just so happened to be born into (which is pretty lucky if you think about it, what are the odds).

And she doesn't hate anybody, she just feels bad they're all going to hell. Like she personally doesn't have a problem with anybody, but it's just a fact based on the arbitrary interpretations of some old dumb books ('the longest game of telephone' is how I like to think of it) that certain people will go to hell. She can't help it, it's just the way it is. People who steal, people who get divorced, people who aren't her and her family, they're just all going to go to hell and that's unfortunate (this isn't something she'd casually say to anybody btw, my other friend dragged it all out while I clawed at the door handle, calculating how many bones I wouldn't mind breaking vs. continuing to stay in the car). Anyway. She's a 'good person', she gives to charity, she works to improve religious people's lives and isn't outwardly judgemental any more than normal people. She has a lot of gay friends. She's even fine with gay marriage (except for you know, it causing you to end up in hell after death, but she can't do anything about that). When I think about how she genuinely thinks most people she ever meets will suffer for eternity just for being born into different circumstances than her, it's kind of a bummer and a thought process I have no real understanding of because hell (and the rest of it) is nonsense. But then I think: it's not nonsense to her, and.. that's pretty fucked up then, isn't it. It all creeps me out to be completely honest, but again, we don't talk about it. Because she's fun to go to dinner with occasionally, or see a movie, and we have a shared history.

I assume it's the same kind of thing for Phil (and a lot of people?), but then again I hope Phil has more respect for himself than I do for myself, and I suppose it's one thing to hang out with a person every few weeks, but another to promote their existence to a large group of people with a collab (public friendships: how do they work). I feel like the topic of gay marriage wouldn't ever even come up when they're just catching up at a convention, maybe discussing old school YT memories, you know, just being normal people. These things don't enter into your interactions when they're not actively hateful people and just see things differently, you know what I'm saying. I'm not trying to defend it, but don't we all have people in our lives with some uncomfortable viewpoints we kind of gloss over? (But I mean, if not, please give me pointers on how to find and make better friends, because I'm honestly bad at life).
lol I'll actually high five your tiny rubber hand with my own because I do relate.
A good friend of mine since high school can be pretty racist and especially islamophobic and anti-immigrant in a 'I know they're not all bad BUT' way and I just know that if she voted that she voted PVV. So I just.. don't ever talk to her about anything political or relating to that anymore. I've tried the discussion with her so many times but it seems futile. None of her muslim friends and coworkers ever seems to correct her either so I've kinda given up. I don't hang out with her a whole lot, maybe once every few months and our conversations on Whatsapp are pretty shallow so she's definitely not my best friend (I really couldn't deal if my bestie was like that) but more on a 'you're a nice person to spend time with when I'm craving friendly social interaction with someone because my other options live elsewhere' level I guess.
That said my comment was aimed at the fact that D&P that you can side eye for some shady shit. From one who once compared the meat industry to the Holocaust or someone alledgedly abusive to their pets to just.. Pewdiepie (not to bring up the discussion from a few months ago again buuuuut) and it's just really NAGL. I know Depz aren't unproblematic themselves or anything and I like plenty of people and things that are problematic (it's inevitable and hell we were all uneducated ignorant little fucks at some point over something) but I do want to lock them in a room away from these people sometimes.
Last edited by Catallena on Sat May 27, 2017 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Twitter *•.(★).•* Tumblr
User avatar
000dia000
emo goose
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Ireland

alittledizzy wrote:
000dia000 wrote:However, I don't want to go on a witch hunt to her, considering Dan (and probably Phil) have also said borderline homophobic/ignorant things in the past, they have changed, and we give them the "slip." All I'm doing right now is questioning the choice of person involved and "called out" (usually a woman) and just highlighting how I find women are more closely scrutinized while male faces are overlooked.
Fully agree that there shouldn't be a witch hunt, just to get that out of the way first.

But on the topic of scrutinizing - I'm not sure what the alternative would be here. Not talk about her being (to steal jhambs' wording from twitter) a type of soft homophobe because she's a woman? Because that also doesn't sit right with me.

Outside of the context of a discussion forum where talking about things Dan and Phil do and videos they make is quite literally the purpose, my general attitude towards people with opinions like hers is just to ignore them. But in the context of this forum doing what it does best - overanalyzing everything - I think that happens across the board pretty evenly.
This is all true, I'm just wary of to what degree we scrutinize every little thing she does based on her as an "outsider". It was more so a comment on what way the conversation could potentially progress. Funny enough, the only thing I see that's potentially controversial are people defending trolls (so far invisible) that criticize those who are making Where's Dan? jokes.

Also, Phil doing this obviously simplistic and lacklustre video on her channel is just...kind of sad, considering how few views she has. This considering that she has so many subscribers but so far such few numbers turned out, considering the click-bait name attached. I felt that with Hazel, he brought phans to her and you like her for her personality/you don't and you move on. With Hazel, her personality and content is promising, it's actual quality. Shauna's content, including the video itself (anime recommendations? You serious?) Is just B-rated. Empty entertainment attached to two pretty faces, she doesn't make anime videos every time, and probably makes questionable entertainment based on the numbers. Phil bringing in numbers to the video and potential subscribers is just empty promises.

I suppose my statement is questionable as it's based on my own preference and bias, but this new video is just...really dull. I turned it off half way through. It's empty. There's nothing substantial to learn or take from it. In six months time an actual devout phan will stumble on it and be like Why have I never seen this before?? and that will be its only legacy.
:cactus:
User avatar
xaephan
pumpkin spice pumpkin cookie
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:13 am

000dia000 wrote:
However, I don't want to go on a witch hunt to her, considering Dan (and probably Phil) have also said borderline homophobic/ignorant things in the past, they have changed, and we give them the "slip." All I'm doing right now is questioning the choice of person involved and "called out" (usually a woman) and just highlighting how I find women are more closely scrutinized while male faces are overlooked.

I highlight this: I do not think she is exempt from criticism, I just want to make an observation based on typical behaviours I see, and to keep biases out of mind. (dont take this out of context)
In general, I agree! Women always gets criticized more frequently and more severely, and often men just skate by or their issues get swept under the rug. A few people have already mentioned it, but if she's shown that she has changed her stance, it would be forgiven since people grow/change and it'd be dumb to hold something that they expressed years ago against them. Unfortunately, from the tweet dizzy quoted, it doesn't seem like the case.

On the topic of dnp and their past transgressions--mostly they've stopped doing/saying those homophobic or ignorant things and stated how what they said/did before wasn't okay. I'd like to think that if Shawna does the same, we'd forgive her like we did dnp.
I just want to applaud fancybum and Catallena's posts, because yes.

Edit: I'm not sure if it's my wonky browser or what, but my post is showing as super stretched horizontally. Hopefully I didn't break the formatting on the forum somehow...
if my heart was a compass you'd be north
previously myllakka
onetruetrash
blobfish
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:35 am

000dia000 wrote:However, I don't want to go on a witch hunt to her, considering Dan (and probably Phil) have also said borderline homophobic/ignorant things in the past, they have changed, and we give them the "slip."
Wait, what homophobic things have Dan and Phil said? The only thing I can remember is the thing Dan said in his "what did YOU get for christmas?" video and if you've watched the video you know what I'm talking about. But even then, Dan was mocking homophobic people. I mean, don't get me wrong, they've done problematic things, I'm pretty sure we know that after what happened earlier, but not homophobic.
User avatar
lurker
janice from the shop
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 2:02 pm
Pronouns: they/them

thought process on coming online again after a few hours:
(1) the collab was cute and i really had to laugh @phil for basically repeating what dan said in his anime recs about death note, deps sure talk out their opinions don't they
(2) oh, the sail video, that's where i know her from
(3) ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

i'm sorry i wanted to make an actual reply but i've found that "ugh" is the only reaction i can still muster re: these sorts of opinions. deliver me. i'm tired. goodnight everyone.
thank's you were great
User avatar
000dia000
emo goose
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Ireland

onetruetrash wrote:
000dia000 wrote:However, I don't want to go on a witch hunt to her, considering Dan (and probably Phil) have also said borderline homophobic/ignorant things in the past, they have changed, and we give them the "slip."
Wait, what homophobic things have Dan and Phil said? The only thing I can remember is the thing Dan said in his "what did YOU get for christmas?" video and if you've watched the video you know what I'm talking about. But even then, Dan was mocking homophobic people. I mean, don't get me wrong, they've done problematic things, I'm pretty sure we know that after what happened earlier, but not homophobic.
Well, a lot of things he said in 2012 are arguably homophobic. Phil has never made any similar strong statements that I recollect off the top of my head, but I said *probably* not to excuse any, if there are.(I don't want to attack Dan). A lot of Dan's behaviour people have wrote off as situational and due to the threat and insecurity he felt. But they still happened.
Now, I don't want to make a list of everything he said (it's depressing and it's the middle of the nigh) but I would recommend going through his sexuality mentions video compilation (gay denials, etc) and responses from his Customer Service Blog. It becomes overwhelming and frankly uncomfortable .

But I stress: you can choose to believe that Dan has changed (and he obviously has) but it still happened, that's the point. Even when he had *reason* to, it still happened. It's not arguable, it happened, and the comments he made are all genuine.

The point I was trying to make was how despite these statements he has made, he has shown overwhelming improvement since and this changes the current nature and our treatment of what he has said. We have rationalized what he has said with time, because we have given him the opportunity to appeal. I think in the case of Shauna, maybe she has changed her ways, maybe she has not, maybe one day we can give her the same treatment Dan has received. Or maybe she'll never "deserve" it.

I think I just felt that a lot of the time, understanding is a lot easier to give when we are already sympathetic with the person, but as an outsider Shauna may not have the same opportunity.
:cactus:
onetruetrash
blobfish
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:35 am

000dia000 wrote:
onetruetrash wrote:
000dia000 wrote:However, I don't want to go on a witch hunt to her, considering Dan (and probably Phil) have also said borderline homophobic/ignorant things in the past, they have changed, and we give them the "slip."
Wait, what homophobic things have Dan and Phil said? The only thing I can remember is the thing Dan said in his "what did YOU get for christmas?" video and if you've watched the video you know what I'm talking about. But even then, Dan was mocking homophobic people. I mean, don't get me wrong, they've done problematic things, I'm pretty sure we know that after what happened earlier, but not homophobic.
Well, a lot of things he said in 2012 are arguably homophobic. Phil has never made any similar strong statements that I recollect off the top of my head, but I said *probably* not to excuse any, if there are.(I don't want to attack Dan). A lot of Dan's behaviour people have wrote off as situational and due to the threat and insecurity he felt. But they still happened.
Now, I don't want to make a list of everything he said (it's depressing and it's the middle of the nigh) but I would recommend going through his sexuality mentions video compilation (gay denials, etc) and responses from his Customer Service Blog. It becomes overwhelming and frankly uncomfortable .

But I stress: you can choose to believe that Dan has changed (and he obviously has) but it still happened, that's the point. Even when he had *reason* to, it still happened. It's not arguable, it happened, and the comments he made are all genuine.

The point I was trying to make was how despite these statements he has made, he has shown overwhelming improvement since and this changes the current nature and our treatment of what he has said. We have rationalized what he has said with time, because we have given him the opportunity to appeal. I think in the case of Shauna, maybe she has changed her ways, maybe she has not, maybe one day we can give her the same treatment Dan has received. Or maybe she'll never "deserve" it.

I think I just felt that a lot of the time, understanding is a lot easier to give when we are already sympathetic with the person, but as an outsider Shauna may not have the same opportunity.
Oh yeah, of course. I guess his comments could be considered homophobic. That is just probably due to the fact that he some sort of internalized homophobia or shame or fear for whatever reason. That's not really comparable to Nanalew or whatever her name is since it's just ignorance. Maybe she'll be forgiven if she change her views.
capybantsa
glabella
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 4:30 am
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Japan

[offtopic]For the record: Autism is a developmental disorder, not a mental illness. I know it's a little late but I just wanted to say that.


Re: Reeeee (hehe)
For those who think certain types of jokes or words should not be said because they are offensive to some people even if they're not offensive to others, what do you think about "queer"? I see this word a lot on this forum, and nobody ever brings up the fact that it's labeled as a pejorative in the dictionary and that many people still find it offensive. Is it different from other offensive things in your mind, or did you just never think about it? I'm really curious.

My friends and I choose not to use it, but not really because of the pejorative aspect. It's synonymous with "strange" and we disagree with labeling of non-heterosexuality as "strange" or heterosexuality as "normal" (which people do in Japan, sigh).


Re: Shawna and gay marriage
If she doesn't want to fight against legalization then I don't really care what she thinks. She has the right to think we're going to Hell, and we have the right to choose that path for ourselves.[/offtopic]

Re: The actual video
It seems Phil isn't in his AP branding for this video, which is interesting. Their pronunciation of some things............ I had to listen several times to understand
:gg:
Phil chose a heroine with one of the hardest lives ever. He could've chosen somebody like Usagi! She has a sparkly life with many friends and cool powers!
They mentioned so many titles I've never heard of lol
User avatar
adequate duck
cheeky #spon
Posts: 219
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:49 am
Pronouns: she/they
Location: Australia

capybantsa wrote: Re: Reeeee (hehe)
For those who think certain types of jokes or words should not be said because they are offensive to some people even if they're not offensive to others, what do you think about "queer"? I see this word a lot on this forum, and nobody ever brings up the fact that it's labeled as a pejorative in the dictionary and that many people still find it offensive. Is it different from other offensive things in your mind, or did you just never think about it? I'm really curious.
dude we've had that conversation several times before. there are those who use the word queer because it describes them best, those that hate it as a slur, and various people with viewpoints in the middle - the most recent discussion i think was earlier this year when dan called a cigarette a 'fag' in something and it went on from there.
"don't respect any ducks" - phil lester
onetruetrash
blobfish
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:35 am

adequate duck wrote:
capybantsa wrote: Re: Reeeee (hehe)
For those who think certain types of jokes or words should not be said because they are offensive to some people even if they're not offensive to others, what do you think about "queer"? I see this word a lot on this forum, and nobody ever brings up the fact that it's labeled as a pejorative in the dictionary and that many people still find it offensive. Is it different from other offensive things in your mind, or did you just never think about it? I'm really curious.
dude we've had that conversation several times before. there are those who use the word queer because it describes them best, those that hate it as a slur, and various people with viewpoints in the middle - the most recent discussion i think was earlier this year when dan called a cigarette a 'fag' in something and it went on from there.
Calm down, they just made an account last month.
User avatar
fancybum
senpai
Posts: 1783
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:06 am
Location: bork

onetruetrash wrote:
adequate duck wrote:
capybantsa wrote: Re: Reeeee (hehe)
For those who think certain types of jokes or words should not be said because they are offensive to some people even if they're not offensive to others, what do you think about "queer"? I see this word a lot on this forum, and nobody ever brings up the fact that it's labeled as a pejorative in the dictionary and that many people still find it offensive. Is it different from other offensive things in your mind, or did you just never think about it? I'm really curious.
dude we've had that conversation several times before. there are those who use the word queer because it describes them best, those that hate it as a slur, and various people with viewpoints in the middle - the most recent discussion i think was earlier this year when dan called a cigarette a 'fag' in something and it went on from there.
Calm down, they just made an account last month.
What about the post was uncalm? He asked a question and he got a thorough answer, it seems to me.
Thanks and have a great day! Oil me
User avatar
Birdie
blobfish
Posts: 650
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 8:22 pm
Pronouns: they/them

adequate duck wrote:
capybantsa wrote: Re: Reeeee (hehe)
For those who think certain types of jokes or words should not be said because they are offensive to some people even if they're not offensive to others, what do you think about "queer"? I see this word a lot on this forum, and nobody ever brings up the fact that it's labeled as a pejorative in the dictionary and that many people still find it offensive. Is it different from other offensive things in your mind, or did you just never think about it? I'm really curious.
dude we've had that conversation several times before. there are those who use the word queer because it describes them best, those that hate it as a slur, and various people with viewpoints in the middle - the most recent discussion i think was earlier this year when dan called a cigarette a 'fag' in something and it went on from there.
Yes, we had this discussion/fight happening a few months ago. I think we came to the conclusion that it's cool to label yourself and unspecified groups as queer (like "the queer community", "queer studies") but not specified people who might not want to use that label. Reclaiming words is tricky business, I guess, but I don't think it's comparable to the reeee-business. I'm not really sure though since I have no idea about that meme's background apart from what I read on here today.

The new collab: I read about her homophobia before I had time to watch the video and now I've lost all interest in it. I guess I'll skip that one. I'm absolutely not okay with her mindset, I think it's the most toxic kind of ignorance you can display actually. "I'll let you do it but I won't agree with it" is just so passive aggressive and dangerous actually. What she's basically saying is that she hates us and she thinks we're going to hell or whatever but she won't attack us over it. I don't know about her but most people with that kind of mindset expect brownie points for it. "I hate you but I'm not going to hurt you over it, isn't that great of me?"

Her attitude is really scary to me actually, scarier than outright homophobia, because it's so easy to excuse and say "At least she's not hurting anybody!" when in fact she is hurting people because the message she's passing on is that gay marriage is wrong and she's just tolerating that it's happening because she's such a good person. I think if she truly believed what she says she would just not talk about it because she'd realise her opinion doesn't matter. Like, if you really think gay marriage should be legal even though you personally don't agree with it, you wouldn't be vocal about not agreeing with it, would you? I'm not sure if I'm coherent right now but people like this scare me.
squishydanny
crusty sponge
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:27 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: USA

well you could say i'm a little more than irritated right now. i watched the video, and unlike almost everyone i've seen talking about it, i initially did not get a good vibe from nanalew. for some reason she was coming off kind of pretentious/know it all when talking to phil about anime, and she just gave me a strange feeling. after reading all this shit about her ignorance/homophobia, my dislike for her is affirmed. of course im not going to send her hate or anything, but i most definitely will not be watching any more of her videos. i decided to go on her social blade to check out if she gained any subscribers from collabing with phil and... :sideeye: she did. a lot. 4,496 to be exact (as of now). she also got 94,000 views in a day on this video- the last video that she posted even remotely close to this view count is from 9 months ago. idk just posting because it annoys me to think someone with beliefs like she has is gaining support from the phandom who are all, for the most part, very very pro LGBTQ+. AND the traffic to her channel will only continue after phil posts the collab with her on amazingphil. sigh, ignorance is bliss i guess! guess im just disappointed and wanted to vent.
llion
living flop
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:45 am
Pronouns: she/her

squishydanny wrote:well you could say i'm a little more than irritated right now. i watched the video, and unlike almost everyone i've seen talking about it, i did not get a good vibe from nanalew. for some reason she was coming off kind of pretentious/know it all when talking to phil about anime, and she just gave me a strange feeling. after reading all this shit about her ignorance/homophobia, my dislike for her is affirmed. of course im not going to send her hate or anything, but i most definitely will not be watching any more of her videos. i decided to go on her social blade to check out if she gained any subscribers from collabing with phil and... :sideeye: she did. a lot. 4,496 to be exact. she also got 94,000 views in a day- the last video that she posted even remotely close to this view count is from 9 months ago. idk just posting because it annoys me to think someone with beliefs like she has is gaining support from the phandom who are all, for the most part, very very pro LGBTQ+. AND the traffic to her channel will only continue after phil posts the collab with her on amazingphil. sigh, ignorance is bliss i guess!
i did catch that at points, but i felt like it was either just me or i was magnifying what was actually happening. i watched through it a second time (wish i didn't give her the view but) to see if i was just being oversensitive but i caught it both times. thanks for adding this, cause i kind of felt crazy myself! still thought phil was extra cute, though. sad her attitude put a damper on everything. :(
Image
art credit: koreinkorein (thank you!)
capybantsa
glabella
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 4:30 am
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Japan

Oh, sorry I missed it, I haven't read back much. There are almost a thousand posts per D&P thread, and this is #46. It's too much to go through.

I just wanted to ask specifically to the people who have been saying you should avoid saying certain things because they might be offensive to some people, because some of them are the same people saying "queer". I was curious about what's going on in their minds.
Katka wrote:
The new collab: I read about her homophobia before I had time to watch the video and now I've lost all interest in it. I guess I'll skip that one. I'm absolutely not okay with her mindset, I think it's the most toxic kind of ignorance you can display actually. "I'll let you do it but I won't agree with it" is just so passive aggressive and dangerous actually. What she's basically saying is that she hates us and she thinks we're going to hell or whatever but she won't attack us over it. I don't know about her but most people with that kind of mindset expect brownie points for it. "I hate you but I'm not going to hurt you over it, isn't that great of me?"

Her attitude is really scary to me actually, scarier than outright homophobia, because it's so easy to excuse and say "At least she's not hurting anybody!" when in fact she is hurting people because the message she's passing on is that gay marriage is wrong and she's just tolerating that it's happening because she's such a good person. I think if she truly believed what she says she would just not talk about it because she'd realise her opinion doesn't matter. Like, if you really think gay marriage should be legal even though you personally don't agree with it, you wouldn't be vocal about not agreeing with it, would you? I'm not sure if I'm coherent right now but people like this scare me.
I don't like her opinion, but isn't tolerance the stepping stone to acceptance? First comes tolerance, then comes normalization and acceptance.

Here tolerance is the norm. There are some social issues and a few legal ones, but it's also very safe and there's very little strong opposition. The older generations tolerate it even if they don't like it, and each generation is becoming more and more accepting. I've never felt unsafe or that these tolerant people were "dangerous".
squishydanny wrote:
Image

well you could say i'm a little more than irritated right now, to say the least. i watched the video, and unlike almost everyone i've seen talking about it, i did not get a good vibe from nanalew. for some reason she was coming off kind of pretentious/know it all when talking to phil about anime, and she just gave me a strange feeling. after reading all this shit about her ignorance/homophobia, my dislike for her is affirmed. of course im not going to send her hate or anything, but i most definitely will not be watching any more of her videos. i decided to go on her social blade to check out if she gained any subscribers from collabing with phil and... :sideeye: she did. a lot. she also got 94,000 views in a day- the last video that she posted even remotely close to this view count is from 9 months ago. idk just posting because it annoys me to think someone with beliefs like she has is gaining support from the phandom who are all, for the most part, very very pro LGBTQ+. AND the traffic to her channel will only continue after phil posts the collab with her on amazingphil. sigh, ignorance is bliss i guess!
I actually didn't get that good of a vibe from her either. She doesn't seem evil or horrible, I just don't like her personality much. I wouldn't watch her without somebody I like collaborating.
onetruetrash
blobfish
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:35 am

squishydanny wrote:well you could say i'm a little more than irritated right now. i watched the video, and unlike almost everyone i've seen talking about it, i initially did not get a good vibe from nanalew. for some reason she was coming off kind of pretentious/know it all when talking to phil about anime, and she just gave me a strange feeling. after reading all this shit about her ignorance/homophobia, my dislike for her is affirmed. of course im not going to send her hate or anything, but i most definitely will not be watching any more of her videos. i decided to go on her social blade to check out if she gained any subscribers from collabing with phil and... :sideeye: she did. a lot. 4,496 to be exact (as of now). she also got 94,000 views in a day on this video- the last video that she posted even remotely close to this view count is from 9 months ago. idk just posting because it annoys me to think someone with beliefs like she has is gaining support from the phandom who are all, for the most part, very very pro LGBTQ+. AND the traffic to her channel will only continue after phil posts the collab with her on amazingphil. sigh, ignorance is bliss i guess! guess im just disappointed and wanted to vent.
Hopefully people see her true colors soon enough or lose interest immediately.
jesuisunèléve
phabergé
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:34 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

moaninglisa wrote:
jaej wrote:shawna ~disagrees~ with gay marriage ("you can do it and i dont hate you but i still think its wrong and not right" kind of disagreeing) so i'll be surprised if she becomes a new phandom fave. source is her ask.fm if anyone wants to look it up faster than i can post a link
:sideeye:

I hope demons don't use this as an excuse to attack her, but that's kinda shitty.
She could have changed her mind, though, or at least I want to believe that.
Wait, if you think marriage between a man and a woman is not being intolerant, then what is it????
User avatar
aleanna
glabella
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 2:15 am
Location: Southern California

jesuisunèléve wrote:
moaninglisa wrote:
jaej wrote:shawna ~disagrees~ with gay marriage ("you can do it and i dont hate you but i still think its wrong and not right" kind of disagreeing) so i'll be surprised if she becomes a new phandom fave. source is her ask.fm if anyone wants to look it up faster than i can post a link
:sideeye:

I hope demons don't use this as an excuse to attack her, but that's kinda shitty.
She could have changed her mind, though, or at least I want to believe that.
Wait, if you think marriage between a man and a woman is not being intolerant, then what is it????
I'm not defending her, but couldn't her tweet also read as, "Believing marriage is between a man and a woman isn't bad, but forcing your beliefs (like a law saying that marriage is only between a man and a woman) upon people is bad.

Like, I anti-religion, but I'm tolerant of religious people as long as they don't try to convert people or use their religious to justify harm/hate speech/discrimination/etc. It's more of a "live and let live" attitude. They are bigger (and more dangerous) fish to fry.
Check out my YouTube channel where I post badly edited vlog-things: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4MzLr ... nRQQMRpp6A
User avatar
pilotlight
#relatable
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 7:20 pm
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Canada

I watched the collab before reading anything here, and I thought it was nice. Phil seemed pretty relaxed, and I liked Shawna's personality. I remembered the Sail video she had made with Tessa, but I'd never watched any of her other videos.

:? Good to know she doesn't ~agree~ with my marriage. I mean, she can disagree all she likes, I guess, it's been legal since like...2005 here (cuz apparently we're from the same country?) and isn't going anywhere, but that's disappointing. Wrap it up in civility is fine but her core belief is that I should not have been allowed to get married, so it's kind of hard not to take that personally and shrug it off. BUT I get that it's tricky when it comes to old friends, so overall I guess .
User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 7100
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

aleanna wrote:I'm not defending her, but couldn't her tweet also read as, "Believing marriage is between a man and a woman isn't bad, but forcing your beliefs (like a law saying that marriage is only between a man and a woman) upon people is bad.

Like, I anti-religion, but I'm tolerant of religious people as long as they don't try to convert people or use their religious to justify harm/hate speech/discrimination/etc. It's more of a "live and let live" attitude. They are bigger (and more dangerous) fish to fry.
It could read like that, but a quick dip through her other tweets reveals that she's strongly conservative both socially and fiscally, stated that she'd have voted for Trump if she were voting in the US election (she's Canadian), and lowkey defended Trump and Trump's ban on Muslims into the US as recently as January of this year, so in general she doesn't seem like someone I want to give the benefit of the doubt to. I'm tolerant of differing opinions, up to the point where someone else's opinions appear to involve taking strong stances against equality, freedom, and basic human rights of other people.

Though I agree that there are bigger fish to fry, and I sincerely hope she gets no hate or harassment. But I think it's definitely fine in the context of her being someone associated with Dan and Phil for fans of Dan and Phil to draw their own personal limits as to how much they want to support her or not based on the things she tweets. (Which I don't think you were arguing against, I just wanted to make that additional point.)
Elemancy
butt chair
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:36 pm

capybantsa wrote:
Katka wrote:
The new collab: I read about her homophobia before I had time to watch the video and now I've lost all interest in it. I guess I'll skip that one. I'm absolutely not okay with her mindset, I think it's the most toxic kind of ignorance you can display actually. "I'll let you do it but I won't agree with it" is just so passive aggressive and dangerous actually. What she's basically saying is that she hates us and she thinks we're going to hell or whatever but she won't attack us over it. I don't know about her but most people with that kind of mindset expect brownie points for it. "I hate you but I'm not going to hurt you over it, isn't that great of me?"

Her attitude is really scary to me actually, scarier than outright homophobia, because it's so easy to excuse and say "At least she's not hurting anybody!" when in fact she is hurting people because the message she's passing on is that gay marriage is wrong and she's just tolerating that it's happening because she's such a good person. I think if she truly believed what she says she would just not talk about it because she'd realise her opinion doesn't matter. Like, if you really think gay marriage should be legal even though you personally don't agree with it, you wouldn't be vocal about not agreeing with it, would you? I'm not sure if I'm coherent right now but people like this scare me.
I don't like her opinion, but isn't tolerance the stepping stone to acceptance? First comes tolerance, then comes normalization and acceptance.

Here tolerance is the norm. There are some social issues and a few legal ones, but it's also very safe and there's very little strong opposition. The older generations tolerate it even if they don't like it, and each generation is becoming more and more accepting. I've never felt unsafe or that these tolerant people were "dangerous".
Where acceptance implies a stated effort to understand or embrace a cause/identity/ideology, etc. tolerance has more of a slippery slope of meaning attached to it where approval is more reluctant and vague. Like saying, “I'll allow for your perspective, but I don’t think it has much of a place in the world on any practical or ethical terms.” Which is fine if say, you're discussing your friend preferring pineapple on pizza, but when specifically applied to discussing the right of two people to share equal legal status and benefits of marriage in a system which constructed these incentives and fail safes to begin with, so that denying them that right would be to undermine them severely, as well as exclude them on the basis of an archaic belief system long since past its date of expiration in coming up to speed with the global conversation of sexuality, it seems more insidious.

Tolerance may be a stepping stone forward to true acceptance, but it can also be one towards taking a step backwards as well, given the right incentive. Just as the current social climate in the U.S has propelled the conversation of immigrants and immigration rights into the forefront of media coverage and social consciousness, more debates have erupted on which groups have a right to stay, who poses an imminent threat and why they should leave, leading in to further conversations about new, more visible, wide spread cases of discrimination and outrage against these groups. It begs the question then, would a person who was in the past begrudgingly tolerant of these people find a newfound freedom in voicing their displeasure now that they found themselves amongst a more hardened group of supporters who thought the same and were more organized and visible about it, so that they no longer had to "tolerate" these people they had for so long harbored quiet misgivings about? In the same vein, would Nanalew, given the same drastic change of social environment/thinking that would more staunchly approve of her own ideas, change tactic from "tolerating" the idea of gay marriage to openly advocating against it? Where she could turn around and say, "see? my perspective was right all along. You can keep thinking how you please, but clearly there's only one logical and sensible approach to this and it's mine" It’s the kind of fear people have struggled with historically in a variety of ways, where their neighbor’s good will gesture of conditional tolerance could provide the opening for unwanted backlash at any moment. You could reference the way some people of varying cultures and backgrounds bend over backwards to disprove the negative stereotypes attributed to them, fearful that if they even slightly affirm their critic’s worst expectations they’ll find themselves wrapped up in a legal or domestic dispute to their disadvantage.

So I think that’s the main reason for the discontent expressed towards Nanalew’s viewpoints, where a statement of clear, unhesitating welcome approval is more trustworthy than a grumbling shoulder shrug of a reply which implies more intolerance than it’s meant to dispute.
Sure, it can be a positive change of pace from outright rejection but it’s still a fragile frame of mind that holds those same seeds of rejection as its foundation. Give it the right environment to grow, or the wrong one, and it can turn bad very quickly. Waiting to see which it will be is not the most comfortable game to play when it's your identity or rights at stake.

aleanna wrote: I'm not defending her, but couldn't her tweet also read as, "Believing marriage is between a man and a woman isn't bad, but forcing your beliefs (like a law saying that marriage is only between a man and a woman) upon people is bad.

Like, I anti-religion, but I'm tolerant of religious people as long as they don't try to convert people or use their religious to justify harm/hate speech/discrimination/etc. It's more of a "live and let live" attitude. They are bigger (and more dangerous) fish to fry.
It's more that her above stated opinion of marriage upholds a political and legal viewpoint which actively works against all people who don't fit into the "traditional" definition. You'll have politicians who want to appeal to their constituents and if they collectively, in overwhelming numbers, debate for marriage to continue to uphold their traditional religious beliefs then that politician will most likely lobby in favor of legislation which makes sure those perspectives are represented over any minority dissension. It's just one example where suddenly a belief is no longer constrained to one person or a community but has spread to affect an entire area in a real and tangible way. It's not about forcing a belief on anyone, it's pointing out the harm a belief can potentially cause. (and arguably, already has)

in that case "live and let live" becomes more of a conceit when it's those same ideals that contributes in making it difficult for others to simply live in the first place.
:dildo:
jesuisunèléve
phabergé
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:34 am
Location: Pacific Northwest

aleanna wrote:
jesuisunèléve wrote:
moaninglisa wrote:
jaej wrote:shawna ~disagrees~ with gay marriage ("you can do it and i dont hate you but i still think its wrong and not right" kind of disagreeing) so i'll be surprised if she becomes a new phandom fave. source is her ask.fm if anyone wants to look it up faster than i can post a link
:sideeye:

I hope demons don't use this as an excuse to attack her, but that's kinda shitty.
She could have changed her mind, though, or at least I want to believe that.
Wait, if you think marriage between a man and a woman is not being intolerant, then what is it????
I'm not defending her, but couldn't her tweet also read as, "Believing marriage is between a man and a woman isn't bad, but forcing your beliefs (like a law saying that marriage is only between a man and a woman) upon people is bad.

Like, I anti-religion, but I'm tolerant of religious people as long as they don't try to convert people or use their religious to justify harm/hate speech/discrimination/etc. It's more of a "live and let live" attitude. They are bigger (and more dangerous) fish to fry.
Agreed, there are bigger fish to fry, but in my mind, she isn't even giving a live and let live attitude. Oppression/Discrimination et al doesn't have a median. You are or you aren't. Agreeing to religious doctrine that marriage is between a man and a woman is right up there with the 14th Amendment saying blacks, and children of blacks, cannot be citizens. Just because it's written somewhere doesn't mean it's right, and truth also doesn't mean its right. If that is her truth, so be it. I accept it as what she believes in and I do not fault her for that, but I don't have to support her belief by supporting her.
User avatar
daichii
rainbow nerd
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 1:49 am
Pronouns: she | her

it's so disappointing to hear about nanalew's views on lgbtq+ marriage. I watched the video before reading all this and thought it was a cool and relaxed, they give the vibe that they've known each other for a while and though she does seem a bit know-it-all I was looking forward to the next one.

She is sending mixed signals tho because I read some of the youtube comments and there's one where she states that she likes the yuri on ice ost. Anyways it is so weird to me to see that in 2017 there is a youtuber that thinks marriage is only between a man and a woman.
Image
Artdefines06
ar·tic·u·late
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 11:51 pm
Pronouns: She/They/Nothing
Location: Washington, USA

Oh man, I just came here to say I loved the new sims vid because it felt so much like the early ones where things just kinda happened and it excited me because I missed that vibe.

I also wanted to complain about why there was no yuri on ice in the anime talk, but maybe now I know..
User avatar
dontpanic
#relatable
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 5:25 am
Location: I've never seen the snow

I have nothing to contribute to this conversation except , this conversation is very enlightening. tbh my university is in a very $$$ and conservative area and she seems exactlylike some people here who whispers 'ew' to their friends when walking by a same-sex couple (a satellite friend once whispered that to me and I didn't have the heart to tell her I'm so queer macklemore'd want to befriend me). . . (now I'm imagining Shawna doing that with Deppy )
Artdefines06 wrote:Oh man, I just came here to say I loved the new sims vid because it felt so much like the early ones where things just kinda happened and it excited me because I missed that vibe.

I also wanted to complain about why there was no yuri on ice in the anime talk, but maybe now I know..
I must be tired because I literally laughed out loud at the bolded part ...we still have a part two, maybe Phil will mention it, but tbh she'd probably edit it out given her current sentiments re: the socio-political climate.

Also, I don't know who brought her up, but now I really want Phil to collab with strawburry17 again, that was a pleasant video. It's nice when he collabs with people he likes being around instead of those he has nothing in common with bar a massive subscriber base (*cough* Casper, Jim, Connor *cough*). Tyler and Dan's videos are hilarious, but Tyler and Phil's vid's painful to watch.

Edit: I wonder if Shawna feels a bit apprehensive about being in a vid on Phil's channel? She must know he subscriber base wouldn't be very receptive to her views on social/political topics...
Last edited by dontpanic on Sun May 28, 2017 7:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
Locked