Dan & Phil Part 52: And They Were Roommates

[ArtyJim]

Also, this lamp situation is severly upsetting me:

Similarly, I cannot unsee these bedside tables:

Dan's love for symmetry has failed

what is the conspiracy behind dan and phil not giving a fuck about dil and tabitha's room? lol

[sentinel]

Also, this lamp situation is severly upsetting me:

Similarly, I cannot unsee these bedside tables:

Dan's love for symmetry has failed

what is the conspiracy behind dan and phil not giving a fuck about dil and tabitha's room? lol

Like every adult couple I've ever met, they don't give a fuck about the bedroom because it's just where they sleep and the rest of the house is the only thing that matters, because that's where they spend their days.

[relatablemood]

i used to post here quite consistently (for someone not used to message boards). i loved it. the atmosphere, the bants. the only thing that changed really was my love for deppy. im at a point where im beginning to DISLIKE dan. literally. i dont know how or when it happened, but i do think i know why.

they both are so ... contrived. it irks me. it's like they've settled so comfortably in their roles i can almost predict the jokes. its boring, and lackluster.
phil: says smthin relatively normal
dan: *face* lets move past that

dan: screams
dan: dumb tumblr joke
phil: ridiculous tweet that sounds like it was curated for an audience. which it was but cmon man, showing ur personality beyond food and clumsiness wont kill you.

theyre ridiculously boring at this point. i dont even care if they're together. if they fuck and dont speak about it in the morning. i used to ponder these things seriously, and i couldnt care less anymore. they've become boring. honestly. shake things up. be honest. not bc u owe it to us, but because its more entertaining than the god awful 'phil doesn't know what a dildo is, hes actually a child!' such falseties and pretenses its annoying. as hell.

sorry to change the mood or whatnot the only post i read encouraged lurkers to post and just drop their 2 cents. i dont care for them anymore. i like humans. not programmed bots.

and i needed a place to vent all this out. ahh relief lmao

You know, my sister and I had a conversation about this the other day. She still watches them occasionally but she is also very cynical about them. About their exaggerated personalities, about their queerbaiting (more on that later), about their laziness.

And you can all hit me with a rock, but the one thing out of those three that I do fault them for is the laziness. You have YouTubers like PewDiePie and makeup gurus like SophDoesNails who upload regular, quality content, while having their own lives and projects going on. I'll spare them for their inactivity during tour - and even after or beforehand - but a video every two weeks or a lot longer for Dan is just.... really? Even as it is now, with two videos a week and maybe a livestream, they're usually very low-effort and constantly disappoint people on the content they bring out.

It's not like being a YouTuber is easy. But to have people constantly sucking up to them and going "oh, but they spend more time on it to make it higher quality!!". Really, Dan's videos are consistently quality? Moreso than anyone else's who makes three or four videos on their channel per week? I'm inclined to say no. Sometimes it really feels like they're taking advantage of us all

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

Finally, robot!Phil is creepy. Let's just admit it. A thirty year old man who hasn't matured over the years on his channel but rather regressed and became more childlike to appeal to viewers half his age. The non-swearing so everyone thinks he's a precious cinamon roll!!, the way his vulnerable childish image has lead lots of fans to have a personal "Phil's better than Dan you arseholes!!" vendetta, even draw Phil naked was carried on for a lot longer than it should have.

In conclusion: you just inspired me to have a mega rant of my own, which I have to admit was kinda nice, and would anyone want to debate with me on those points? It's mostly my sister that thinks them but I do have dark thoughts like that too, and as much as I love and stan Dan and Phil it's becoming more and more apparent to me - mind, I started off as a ten y/o in the phandom and now I'm sixteen - that they're not as pure and good as people like to make out.

PS. The Japanese merch is wrong, there I said it.

[flarequake]

I don't think I have a ton of critical thoughts, I like them enough that I'm happy with almost everything they do and the rest I just forgive. Frequency of uploading is light for Dan, but I watch GaryC who has never had a schedule (though usually uploads more often than Dan anyway), and Paint (Jon Cozart) who might upload this year if he decides he's written a great song (he has just collabed with Hannah, Grace and Mamrie, but that was one whole day of filming in the same tshirt and so far all on their channels, so I guess they've done the editing). I know that if pressure gets to me about something, pushing through it is almost impossible so if it was due to something like that, I get it.

Phil doesn't swear because kids watch him, I don't think that was purposely to be cute. He was different when he was way younger, more how you'd expect a guy his age to talk, then I think he noticed the demographic of his audience or his management had an idea, or he did, to be more "kittens and rainbows" as Dan put it ages ago. His Manchester apartment-time videos were cuter than the earlier ones and in Pinof 3 they both act younger than in Pinof 2. He's also chilled it a fair bit over the last two years. He knows his age, but also something made him be less open (maybe he wasn't ever as open as Dan? I haven't seen many old liveshows, but he's also way less energetic and uses a lower voice in them, his energy now is a lot more fun to watch although the older ones were still interesting).

They fell into a double-act thing with silly things Phil said getting rolled eyes and a comment from Dan, and they've calmed that down too. Some of it is probably stuff they've found works and is comfortable. They've probably got plans for something they're working on in the background so changing up what they already do could be too much. I love Dan's sketches and storytimes and Phil's chatty vlogs, I think those work well.

Having said all that, I'm interested to hear people's criticisms. People have said 2015 might have been their peak so they probably don't want to stagnate as robots.

[LtrllySusan]

As an ace/aro person, I would personally be selfishly thrilled if they were proven to be platonic with their type of friendship, because that's exactly the kind of relationship I dream of being able to have (and likely never will). So it's not that strange to me for that slightly different reason.

I can kind of pretend to live vicariously through them now in this limbo state, but chances seem higher that they're just another typical boring romantic-type couple so I try not to get too attached to the idea. But I mean, good for what makes them happy or whatever. I wouldn't say it'd lose value if they were out though, they still have a pretty crazy origin story and really strong chemistry that's fun to watch. There's also nothing wrong with the idea that your other half can be your best friend most of all.

I was considering writing this when I saw the discussion that some people had about the possibility of Dan not being binary a few pages back, but I didn't want to offend anyone so I didn't. But I can't help but feel a bit offended by your post myself

Please don't get this the wrong way, I firmly support LGBTQ+ and I believe role-models and representation are important for everyone in that community. However, I find it a bit mean to call a romantic relationship "boring". It's similar to when people a few pages back expressed their wishful thinking of Dan being non-binary. Dan is what Dan is and not what would suit someone's personal needs of a rolemodel. After all, isn't the whole LGBTQ+ movement about being yourself, and not about being what others project onto you?

I really hope this isn't coming out the wrong way and once again, I love how inclusive the phandom community is with everyone's gender and sexuality, but please don't forget that us average cis straight people are also valid and don't deserve to be called "boring", and you shouldn't wish that we were something else.

[bantstrash]

I post... rarely.

I have to say, everytime I see the "queerbaiting" topic is about to get started again I have to leave IDB for a few days because I just can't with it anymore. I don't want to stifle discussion but there is such a thing as TOO MANY TIMES.

As regards to Phil not swearing, I don't swear in public, I don't think it's polite. I also have little respect for people who can't moderate their language based on where they are. Does this mean I never swear? No. So I think Phil has decided that it is not appropriate for him to swear in public life and is moderating his language to achieve that. It doesn't make him immature, rather the opposite I would say.

[relatablemood]

Phil doesn't swear because kids watch him, I don't think that was purposely to be cute. He was different when he was way younger, more how you'd expect a guy his age to talk, then I think he noticed the demographic of his audience or his management had an idea, or he did, to be more "kittens and rainbows" as Dan put it ages ago. His Manchester apartment-time videos were cuter than the earlier ones and in Pinof 3 they both act younger than in Pinof 2. He's also chilled it a fair bit over the last two years. He knows his age, but also something made him be less open (maybe he wasn't ever as open as Dan? I haven't seen many old liveshows, but he's also way less energetic and uses a lower voice in them, his energy now is a lot more fun to watch although the older ones were still interesting).

They fell into a double-act thing with silly things Phil said getting rolled eyes and a comment from Dan, and they've calmed that down too. Some of it is probably stuff they've found works and is comfortable. They've probably got plans for something they're working on in the background so changing up what they already do could be too much. I love Dan's sketches and storytimes and Phil's chatty vlogs, I think those work well.

I wouldn't say they've calmed that down. You start watching a gaming video and right off the bat, Phil calls the audience something weird and Dan mocks him.

And didn't you just kinda hammer in my point? If Phil is trying not to swear to appease his demographic, then isn't that another way of saying that he's catering and changing his personality to young girls? I mean, I'm pretty sure Dan has the same demographic and he does what he wants (when he can be bothered to, that is). I feel like Phil really put himself in a corner here and it's his fault that he has the image that he has, and now, sure, his management is telling him to stick with it, but there would be nothing to stick with in the first place if he'd just carried on the way he was back in 2009 and earlier, with some subtle changes. I'm just saying that this AmazingPhil persona is getting old and unnerving and he really should drop it before he turns 35, looks back at his career and goes "oh, fuck, I'm a closeted man making kawaii faces at teenagers young enough to be my children".

I post... rarely.

I have to say, everytime I see the "queerbaiting" topic is about to get started again I have to leave IDB for a few days because I just can't with it anymore. I don't want to stifle discussion but there is such a thing as TOO MANY TIMES.

As regards to Phil not swearing, I don't swear in public, I don't think it's polite. I also have little respect for people who can't moderate their language based on where they are. Does this mean I never swear? No. So I think Phil has decided that it is not appropriate for him to swear in public life and is moderating his language to achieve that. It doesn't make him immature, rather the opposite I would say.

You're reaching a little bit. It's not so much about Phil swearing, but about the censorship of his more cheeky, adult like side. I never said it made him immature either - because he isn't, he pretends to be. He's just like a child who's never heard the word 'Hell' without gasping, our little "cinammon roll" Think of it this way - sure, swearing is impolite and it's nice not to do it in your videos, but when you give off this vibe and all these references to being childlike and innocent and pure, and gasp/ignore it whenever Dan makes an innuendo... It's all part of a bigger picture.

[thephandommenace]

I've had the opposite experience joining the phandom - I went from thinking "wow, Dan's kind of an asshole" to "aww he's an adorable squish" (not to say that the asshole in him disappeared... "The butt is a big muscle." - Dan Howell, April 2016)

Dan can be annoying but in a way that I love? Phil is a robot but I find him fascinating because of it. His poker face is impressively impassive. But he can also be a sneaky snek and you don't realise how much he/his content has loosened up until you look back and realise, when did that change?

You can argue about their inauthenticity and lack of depth but despite their persona-heavy content they are two human beings and there's more to them that meets the eye. I love noticing the little subtleties. Also, do you expect every YouTuber to open up about their lives? When you watch people like Dodie or Tom who wear their hearts on their sleeve and talk about personal topics it is a very jarring contrast to the 'curated' images of most big vloggers. But they also have a tendency to overshare and misstep boundaries, and other YouTubers may feel pressured to share parts of their lives in order to form a 'real' connection with their audience. But there's still that creator/viewer divide. What looks like authenticity can also be inauthentic to an extent: the content creators know that letting people in on their lives helps their audience feel closer to them and like they're a 'real friend', and so feel a deeper sense of loyalty/devotion to them. In a way, they're exploiting their personal lives for views and subscribers. I am not against it, and I would of course love more 'personal' stuff from Deppy, but I don't hold it against them for not giving more. They feel their private lives are absolutely nobody's business, much less millions of viewers, and I can respect that. At the end of the day they are two entertainers who help brighten people's days and forget about their troubles, and we are not entitled to every part of them.

[socksparadox]

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

God bless you for saying this tbh. This is something thats always lowkey irritated me, especially the longer it drags on. Like we get it, you're the ~king of ambiguity~, but I feel like in this case, trying to be ambiguous can definitely give people the wrong idea. For example with the mental illness thing, I feel like if you're going to joke about as a form of coping, you have to clarify that you're using it for coping with your own mental illness, especially if you're in a position where you're profiting off your jokes about it like he does. Otherwise, it's just blatant pandering and exploitation.
And for hypothetical purposes, let's say by the tiniest chance that he's straight, never dated Phil and isn't mentally ill. If that's somehow true, he has dug himself far too deep into a hole he can never get out of. At this point, if he ever decides to say anything other than that he's queer & mentally ill, hooooly heckity are so many people gonna be peeved off (me included) because he's lead so many people to believe otherwise, and has built a career off of making people believe otherwise.
edit: apologies if this is an incoherent disaster its 4:30 am and im half dead

[nephilimcat]

Their home renovation videos are my favourite Sims videos (and among my favourite videos in general). I love when they both get excited about something just as much as when they firmly disagree on something or Phil has to remind Dan that they don't have much money I feel Dan with the symmetry sometimes but I agree that not everything has to be symmetric. And the lamps and bedside tables really bug me, please notice it, I can't unsee it now

You know what's more annoying than people posting a lot? Nobody posting anything. Some people (I'm assuming. other people. toootally not me, nope.) come here a lot throughout the day while at work on legitimate breaks at work (and prob school) and are looking for a lot of posts to read to kill time. On days when there's like hours-long lulls with nobody posting... oh the humanity. Post anything, talk about anything, start an argument (um without breaking rules I guess), we all just want something to read and for some reason we want it to be related to two tall internet nerds. Hey lurker (not lurker, I mean the general lurker, but also hi lurker if you read this ), if you want to come and just talk about how you rank D&P's hairstyles over the years or something, have at it, not everything needs to be Very Important Discourse all the time, if that's something anybody worries about. Just Say Things whether anybody replies or not because we're all reading all the time wow that sounded sinister

This! You have no idea how often I read on here just because I'm bored or sad or procrastinating *cough*. And I'm always sad when there's nothing new. I don't always reply or post something because I just don't have anything new to add or just don't have the energy to write something, especially because I'm sometimes a bit anxious to post things, which means I tend to read my posts like ten times before publishing them. And oh dear, how often did I reply in length only to delete everything and not reply at all.

[relatablemood]

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

God bless you for saying this tbh. This is something thats always lowkey irritated me, especially the longer it drags on. Like we get it, you're the ~king of ambiguity~, but I feel like in this case, trying to be ambiguous can definitely give people the wrong idea. For example with the mental illness thing, I feel like if you're going to joke about as a form of coping, you have to clarify that you're using it for coping with your own mental illness, especially if you're in a position where you're profiting off your jokes about it like he does. Otherwise, it's just blatant pandering and exploitation.
And for hypothetical purposes, let's say by the tiniest chance that he's straight, never dated Phil and isn't mentally ill. If that's somehow true, he has dug himself far too deep into a hole he can never get out of. At this point, if he ever decides to say anything other than that he's queer & mentally ill, hooooly heckity are so many people gonna be peeved off (me included) because he's lead so many people to believe otherwise, and has built a career off of making people believe otherwise.
edit: apologies if this is an incoherent disaster its 4:30 am and im half dead

I'm glad you agree It's just such a grey area and really, Dan must know about it. He must know that he's taking full advantage of being so private that he can say shit without anyone being able to say one way or the other whether he's wrong to do so or not. Like, from the point of view of my sister, who is lesbian and quite involved in the community, she and a lot of others in the community view Dan and Phil as annoying queerbaiters who don't have the courage to stand up for who they are (or aren't) and rather make constant references to having male attraction that would go unnoticed by casual fans, but applauded by stans and used to keep them interested.

That's another maybe - "Dan makes constant references to liking guys, but huh, maybe he doesn't like labels so shut up and don't label hiM!!!! yoURE WRONG HE CAN'T BE QUEERBIAITNGN`!!"

Which is.... funny because you can be queer and still queerbait. You know, drop a few liners about your attraction to guys and have the fetishizing fangirls lap it up while you don't actually use your platform to help the LGBTQIA+ community or confirm that you're in it at all. (If Dan doesn't like labels, good for him, but it'd be nice if you told us that explicitly )

Wow, I'm being such a cynical bitch Also, your post was good and very coherant!!

[RiriPandaHeart2]

I am in no way articulate so forgive me for this word vomit (in terms of quality and length) that I'm going to post:

On the matter of them being inauthentic or having a persona, I honestly find it hard to understand why it's necessarily a bad thing? Even in an individual level, don't we all have different faces/personality projection for different groups of people? I sometimes feel like I have very different personalities depending on who I'm talking to. I'm very vibrant and jolly around family and people I'm comfortable with and very awkward and shy around people with whom I feel intimidated of or those I'm not comfortable with, and different points between the two depending on the people I'm with, my mood at that time, and a whole lot of other factors I can't even begin to comprehend. Looking at it from another perspective, don't we all have "work selves" and "home selves"? You can be the laziest person at home and be an efficient worker at work because you know that the latter projection is needed in that environment despite being lazy. Does that make people inauthentic then?

I think the argument is that they are making off money about the Phandom's perception of them and that makes it bad for them to have personas because people want the real them. I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding it, please feel free to correct me (though please do it civilly as I admit I'm rather... sensitive). But does this mean that every person who profits from a projection of themselves that they feel would fit the situation is inherently bad?

My own answer to the questions I posed above are no. Of course it is true that people tune in to Youtubers because they're more #relatable or more accessible than mainstream celebrities. But I don't think at the end of the day they owe us their true personalities. They still have their own personal lives, which I think should include their personal selves. At the end of the day, Youtubing is a job for them. And as much as I'd literally run around the room for joy if they share more with us, I don't necessarily feel like they have to, for them to meet the common expectation of their fans from them, which for me is as simple as them being entertaining to us in their videos, whether what they're showing is their true selves or an exaggerated form of their true selves or even if it's the complete opposite of who they are irl.

I'm not sure if I got my point across, so sorry if I wasn't able to express my opinion well.

Edit to say that I have no concrete opinions yet on whether they do queerbait, etc. so please don't take this to apply to that specific allegation against them. It's more of a general observation of somebody who does not really see the wrong of being "inauthentic" or not releasing their true selves on their platform.

[nephilimcat]

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

God bless you for saying this tbh. This is something thats always lowkey irritated me, especially the longer it drags on. Like we get it, you're the ~king of ambiguity~, but I feel like in this case, trying to be ambiguous can definitely give people the wrong idea. For example with the mental illness thing, I feel like if you're going to joke about as a form of coping, you have to clarify that you're using it for coping with your own mental illness, especially if you're in a position where you're profiting off your jokes about it like he does. Otherwise, it's just blatant pandering and exploitation.
And for hypothetical purposes, let's say by the tiniest chance that he's straight, never dated Phil and isn't mentally ill. If that's somehow true, he has dug himself far too deep into a hole he can never get out of. At this point, if he ever decides to say anything other than that he's queer & mentally ill, hooooly heckity are so many people gonna be peeved off (me included) because he's lead so many people to believe otherwise, and has built a career off of making people believe otherwise.
edit: apologies if this is an incoherent disaster its 4:30 am and im half dead

I'm glad you agree It's just such a grey area and really, Dan must know about it. He must know that he's taking full advantage of being so private that he can say shit without anyone being able to say one way or the other whether he's wrong to do so or not. Like, from the point of view of my sister, who is lesbian and quite involved in the community, she and a lot of others in the community view Dan and Phil as annoying queerbaiters who don't have the courage to stand up for who they are (or aren't) and rather make constant references to having male attraction that would go unnoticed by casual fans, but applauded by stans and used to keep them interested.

That's another maybe - "Dan makes constant references to liking guys, but huh, maybe he doesn't like labels so shut up and don't label hiM!!!! yoURE WRONG HE CAN'T BE QUEERBIAITNGN`!!"

Which is.... funny because you can be queer and still queerbait. You know, drop a few liners about your attraction to guys and have the fetishizing fangirls lap it up while you don't actually use your platform to help the LGBTQIA+ community or confirm that you're in it at all. (If Dan doesn't like labels, good for him, but it'd be nice if you told us that explicitly )

Wow, I'm being such a cynical bitch Also, your post was good and very coherant!!

No, he doesn't have to explain his sexuality to us. He literally does not have to do that. You cannot be queer and queerbaiting. You aren't queerbaiting because you are queer. If Dan says he likes men, guess what, he is not straight. And he does not have to say anything else because it is crystal clear what he means, even without a label. Just because you are queer does not mean you have to be an activist either. Queer people have every right to stay silent about their sexuality, not go to pride or only share as much as they feel comfortable because you are putting yourself into a vulnerable position. This includes rich people with a huge following like Dan and Phil as well. There are so many reasons not to be (fully) open about your sexuality or at least not to make a big deal out of it and all of them are valid.

And as a mentally ill person: are you really telling me I have to announce that to everyone when I make jokes? I do not feel comfortable talking about my depression and anxiety outside the anonymity of the Internet but I do feel comfortable making jokes about being depressed, death and the like. I don't want to put myself into a position where I have to tell people exactly what my medical conditions are and which pills I swallow because they are none of their business! And does this mean I am not allowed to make the jokes because someone could hear it who does not know about my mental health? I don't think so.

[Susanisnotafish]

You know what's more annoying than people posting a lot? Nobody posting anything. Some people (I'm assuming. other people. toootally not me, nope.) come here a lot throughout the day while at work on legitimate breaks at work (and prob school) and are looking for a lot of posts to read to kill time. On days when there's like hours-long lulls with nobody posting... oh the humanity. Post anything, talk about anything, start an argument (um without breaking rules I guess), we all just want something to read and for some reason we want it to be related to two tall internet nerds. Hey lurker (not lurker, I mean the general lurker, but also hi lurker if you read this ), if you want to come and just talk about how you rank D&P's hairstyles over the years or something, have at it, not everything needs to be Very Important Discourse all the time, if that's something anybody worries about. Just Say Things whether anybody replies or not because we're all reading all the time wow that sounded sinister

I just love your sense of humor! I am another one who just wants people to post on here as often as possible and to keep it somehow tied to deppy bc I'm on here all day every day (except yesterday and today bc I didn't want to get on until I watched Dan's ls). His live shows (unlike Phil's) are so varied moodwise. This week he was very nervous I felt. Some weeks he seems very in control and almost aggressive, but this week he seemed almost submissive to the chat. One thing I really appreciated was one very direct statement regarding what games he was going to stream: "I don't want to tell you." Wish he could be that direct and unapologetic more often.

Sims: thanks to the people who pointed out the "our dream house" comment. I totally didn't notice Dan didn't say "houses". This does seem like a big deal to me. I mean I already believe they will get a house together. But that warms my heart.

Edit to say I agree with Riri and Nephilimicat. Good opinions and expressions of said opinions.

[SquishPhan]

I am in no way articulate so forgive me for this word vomit (in terms of quality and length) that I'm going to post:

On the matter of them being inauthentic or having a persona, I honestly find it hard to understand why it's necessarily a bad thing? Even in an individual level, don't we all have different faces/personality projection for different groups of people? I sometimes feel like I have very different personalities depending on who I'm talking to. I'm very vibrant and jolly around family and people I'm comfortable with and very awkward and shy around people with whom I feel intimidated of or those I'm not comfortable with, and different points between the two depending on the people I'm with, my mood at that time, and a whole lot of other factors I can't even begin to comprehend. Looking at it from another perspective, don't we all have "work selves" and "home selves"? You can be the laziest person at home and be an efficient worker at work because you know that the latter projection is needed in that environment despite being lazy. Does that make people inauthentic then?

I think the argument is that they are making off money about the Phandom's perception of them and that makes it bad for them to have personas because people want the real them. I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding it, please feel free to correct me (though please do it civilly as I admit I'm rather... sensitive). But does this mean that every person who profits from a projection of themselves that they feel would fit the situation is inherently bad?

My own answer to the questions I posed above are no. Of course it is true that people tune in to Youtubers because they're more #relatable or more accessible than mainstream celebrities. But I don't think at the end of the day they owe us their true personalities. They still have their own personal lives, which I think should include their personal selves. At the end of the day, Youtubing is a job for them. And as much as I'd literally run around the room for joy if they share more with us, I don't necessarily feel like they have to, for them to meet the common expectation of their fans from them, which for me is as simple as them being entertaining to us in their videos, whether what they're showing is their true selves or an exaggerated form of their true selves or even if it's the complete opposite of who they are irl.

I'm not sure if I got my point across, so sorry if I wasn't able to express my opinion well.

Edit to say that I have no concrete opinions yet on whether they do queerbait, etc. so please don't take this to apply to that specific allegation against them. It's more of a general observation of somebody who does not really see the wrong of being "inauthentic" or not releasing their true selves on their platform.

Totally agree with this.
I'm also a different person at work than I am at home, but I'm still me at both those places just different parts of myself.
Youtube is their job, so they put a version of themselves (probably an exaggerated version of them, but still them) out front and I don't find that weird or inauthentic.

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

God bless you for saying this tbh. This is something thats always lowkey irritated me, especially the longer it drags on. Like we get it, you're the ~king of ambiguity~, but I feel like in this case, trying to be ambiguous can definitely give people the wrong idea. For example with the mental illness thing, I feel like if you're going to joke about as a form of coping, you have to clarify that you're using it for coping with your own mental illness, especially if you're in a position where you're profiting off your jokes about it like he does. Otherwise, it's just blatant pandering and exploitation.
And for hypothetical purposes, let's say by the tiniest chance that he's straight, never dated Phil and isn't mentally ill. If that's somehow true, he has dug himself far too deep into a hole he can never get out of. At this point, if he ever decides to say anything other than that he's queer & mentally ill, hooooly heckity are so many people gonna be peeved off (me included) because he's lead so many people to believe otherwise, and has built a career off of making people believe otherwise.
edit: apologies if this is an incoherent disaster its 4:30 am and im half dead

I'm glad you agree It's just such a grey area and really, Dan must know about it. He must know that he's taking full advantage of being so private that he can say shit without anyone being able to say one way or the other whether he's wrong to do so or not. Like, from the point of view of my sister, who is lesbian and quite involved in the community, she and a lot of others in the community view Dan and Phil as annoying queerbaiters who don't have the courage to stand up for who they are (or aren't) and rather make constant references to having male attraction that would go unnoticed by casual fans, but applauded by stans and used to keep them interested.

That's another maybe - "Dan makes constant references to liking guys, but huh, maybe he doesn't like labels so shut up and don't label hiM!!!! yoURE WRONG HE CAN'T BE QUEERBIAITNGN`!!"

Which is.... funny because you can be queer and still queerbait. You know, drop a few liners about your attraction to guys and have the fetishizing fangirls lap it up while you don't actually use your platform to help the LGBTQIA+ community or confirm that you're in it at all. (If Dan doesn't like labels, good for him, but it'd be nice if you told us that explicitly )

Wow, I'm being such a cynical bitch Also, your post was good and very coherant!!

No, he doesn't have to explain his sexuality to us. He literally does not have to do that. You cannot be queer and queerbaiting. You aren't queerbaiting because you are queer. If Dan says he likes men, guess what, he is not straight. And he does not have to say anything else because it is crystal clear what he means, even without a label. Just because you are queer does not mean you have to be an activist either. Queer people have every right to stay silent about their sexuality, not go to pride or only share as much as they feel comfortable because you are putting yourself into a vulnerable position. This includes rich people with a huge following like Dan and Phil as well. There are so many reasons not to be (fully) open about your sexuality or at least not to make a big deal out of it and all of them are valid.

And as a mentally ill person: are you really telling me I have to announce that to everyone when I make jokes? I do not feel comfortable talking about my depression and anxiety outside the anonymity of the Internet but I do feel comfortable making jokes about being depressed, death and the like. I don't want to put myself into a position where I have to tell people exactly what my medical conditions are and which pills I swallow because they are none of their business! And does this mean I am not allowed to make the jokes because someone could hear it who does not know about my mental health? I don't think so.

This. So much this.

I firmly believe that Dan is not straight and suffers from some mental illness and I think that he and only he has the right to dictate how much or little he wants to share about that. He doesn’t own anyone an explanation.

[socksparadox]

And as a mentally ill person: are you really telling me I have to announce that to everyone when I make jokes? I do not feel comfortable talking about my depression and anxiety outside the anonymity of the Internet but I do feel comfortable making jokes about being depressed, death and the like. I don't want to put myself into a position where I have to tell people exactly what my medical conditions are and which pills I swallow because they are none of their business! And does this mean I am not allowed to make the jokes because someone could hear it who does not know about my mental health? I don't think so.

As a fellow mentally ill person, no. Nobody is obligated to disclose the specifics of their mental health if they don't want to. But, I think that Dan has gotten himself into somewhat of a difficult position. A lot of mentally ill people (not necessarily me) see what he's doing (joking about social anxiety, depression, etc.) as exploitative. They think that he's only doing it to be Hashtag Relatable and is somewhat glorifying it. Of course, anyone can make these jokes, with a disclosed mental illness or not, but not everybody is profiting off of these jokes like he is. That's what makes it seem a bit iffy. No, of course he doesn't have to go into a full on liveshow-esque ramble about his mental health, nor is he even obligated to share anything about his own personal mental health at all, but I feel like it might appease some people that are uncomfortable with the fact that his entire branding is based off of mental illness and he may not even be actually mentally ill.

[quercussp]

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

God bless you for saying this tbh. This is something thats always lowkey irritated me, especially the longer it drags on. Like we get it, you're the ~king of ambiguity~, but I feel like in this case, trying to be ambiguous can definitely give people the wrong idea. For example with the mental illness thing, I feel like if you're going to joke about as a form of coping, you have to clarify that you're using it for coping with your own mental illness, especially if you're in a position where you're profiting off your jokes about it like he does. Otherwise, it's just blatant pandering and exploitation.
And for hypothetical purposes, let's say by the tiniest chance that he's straight, never dated Phil and isn't mentally ill. If that's somehow true, he has dug himself far too deep into a hole he can never get out of. At this point, if he ever decides to say anything other than that he's queer & mentally ill, hooooly heckity are so many people gonna be peeved off (me included) because he's lead so many people to believe otherwise, and has built a career off of making people believe otherwise.
edit: apologies if this is an incoherent disaster its 4:30 am and im half dead

I'm glad you agree It's just such a grey area and really, Dan must know about it. He must know that he's taking full advantage of being so private that he can say shit without anyone being able to say one way or the other whether he's wrong to do so or not. Like, from the point of view of my sister, who is lesbian and quite involved in the community, she and a lot of others in the community view Dan and Phil as annoying queerbaiters who don't have the courage to stand up for who they are (or aren't) and rather make constant references to having male attraction that would go unnoticed by casual fans, but applauded by stans and used to keep them interested.

That's another maybe - "Dan makes constant references to liking guys, but huh, maybe he doesn't like labels so shut up and don't label hiM!!!! yoURE WRONG HE CAN'T BE QUEERBIAITNGN`!!"

Which is.... funny because you can be queer and still queerbait. You know, drop a few liners about your attraction to guys and have the fetishizing fangirls lap it up while you don't actually use your platform to help the LGBTQIA+ community or confirm that you're in it at all. (If Dan doesn't like labels, good for him, but it'd be nice if you told us that explicitly )

Wow, I'm being such a cynical bitch Also, your post was good and very coherant!!

No, he doesn't have to explain his sexuality to us. He literally does not have to do that. You cannot be queer and queerbaiting. You aren't queerbaiting because you are queer. If Dan says he likes men, guess what, he is not straight. And he does not have to say anything else because it is crystal clear what he means, even without a label. Just because you are queer does not mean you have to be an activist either. Queer people have every right to stay silent about their sexuality, not go to pride or only share as much as they feel comfortable because you are putting yourself into a vulnerable position. This includes rich people with a huge following like Dan and Phil as well. There are so many reasons not to be (fully) open about your sexuality or at least not to make a big deal out of it and all of them are valid.

And as a mentally ill person: are you really telling me I have to announce that to everyone when I make jokes? I do not feel comfortable talking about my depression and anxiety outside the anonymity of the Internet but I do feel comfortable making jokes about being depressed, death and the like. I don't want to put myself into a position where I have to tell people exactly what my medical conditions are and which pills I swallow because they are none of their business! And does this mean I am not allowed to make the jokes because someone could hear it who does not know about my mental health? I don't think so.

YES to all of this! Why does the fact that DnP are queer requires them to use their platform to help the LGBTQ+ community?! You don't have to be an activist! It's not a requirement. And the same for mental illness - both of these issues are personal and no one is obligated to share anything about them!!! This discussion really bugs me.

[citizen_erased]

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

God bless you for saying this tbh. This is something thats always lowkey irritated me, especially the longer it drags on. Like we get it, you're the ~king of ambiguity~, but I feel like in this case, trying to be ambiguous can definitely give people the wrong idea. For example with the mental illness thing, I feel like if you're going to joke about as a form of coping, you have to clarify that you're using it for coping with your own mental illness, especially if you're in a position where you're profiting off your jokes about it like he does. Otherwise, it's just blatant pandering and exploitation.
And for hypothetical purposes, let's say by the tiniest chance that he's straight, never dated Phil and isn't mentally ill. If that's somehow true, he has dug himself far too deep into a hole he can never get out of. At this point, if he ever decides to say anything other than that he's queer & mentally ill, hooooly heckity are so many people gonna be peeved off (me included) because he's lead so many people to believe otherwise, and has built a career off of making people believe otherwise.
edit: apologies if this is an incoherent disaster its 4:30 am and im half dead

the mental health thing is one of the parts that both annoys me and worries me. I have terrible mental health myself, ranging from depression to social anxiety to actual OCD and a mixture thereof depending on what kind of day I'm having and, idk, how the stars are aligned I suppose. And it is so incredibly frustrating to me to see these videos that sound like I could've made them when I was at my worst, and to have that recognition in them, just to see Dan do a full 180 in the comments and go "haha jk I'm totally ok guys! no need to worry about me, this is all just a joke". Because for me it's not, I literally could've been dead for several years now. And at the same time it worries me immensely, because I used to brush it all off and go "haha just kidding" and "oh never mind, I'm just exaggerating" and "I'm just a dramaqueen nevermind me".

Basically I'm torn between wanting to shout at Dan for treating mental illness this way, and wanting to shout at him to please go get some actual professional help. I'm not saying he has to fully explain what's going on, but maybe even just acknowledging it a bit more instead of brushing things off? Add a little something in the description of "if you're really feeling this way please get some professional help"? IDK.

Also a bit belated re: queer platonic friendships. I'm a queer person who used to live in a house with 4 other queer girls who were also my friends, and (as far as I know) there was no sex and no relationships between any of us. There was a lot of drama, sure, but it was never sexual or romantic. In fact, almost my entire friendgroup in uni was queer and despite a LOT of drama very little of it was romantic/sexual. I guess this is also why I tend to just assume that this is normal and don't think about the representation in media revolving mostly around sex (which, to be fair, goes for straight people too). But thinking about it now, I do agree that D&P could be great representation for queer friendships.

Then again, they are under no obligation whatsoever to tell us anything they don't want to tell us. They're entertainers, not our friends (and personally I don't expect my friends to tell me everything either). Entertainers put on personas all the time. So many actors play the same roles time and time again (*coughjohnnydeppcough*) and people are fine with that, so why should we treat D&P any different. I'm just here to enjoy silly banter and I appreciate how they haven't changed that much, because it's nice for me to have this constant in my life, something that I can rely on to be happy and relaxing.

Plus I can imagine the prospect of being forced into the role of spokesperson for lgbt/mental health issues is harrowing at best, but it's also 100% what will happen if they ever do admit to anything.

Argh. Am I still even making sense or am I going in circles, I don't even know anymore.

(final note: I enjoyed the new Sims, but it did feel a bit rushed to me. And honestly guys, you could've been a bit more creative with the house than just "extend this bit, turn it into 4 square rooms, and make the owl slide higher. DONE." But I always appreciate them uploading on Wednesday night because it feels like a little reward after actually going out to be social and sportive.)

[relatablemood]

It also seems like Dan gets away with so much shit on a "maybe". You know, "let's not call Dan out for his glorification of mental illness and how he profits of it by making it his branding because, huh, maybe he's mentally ill himself!". "Let's not call Dan out on queerbaiting becuase, huh, maybe he's in a relationship with Phil!"

God bless you for saying this tbh. This is something thats always lowkey irritated me, especially the longer it drags on. Like we get it, you're the ~king of ambiguity~, but I feel like in this case, trying to be ambiguous can definitely give people the wrong idea. For example with the mental illness thing, I feel like if you're going to joke about as a form of coping, you have to clarify that you're using it for coping with your own mental illness, especially if you're in a position where you're profiting off your jokes about it like he does. Otherwise, it's just blatant pandering and exploitation.
And for hypothetical purposes, let's say by the tiniest chance that he's straight, never dated Phil and isn't mentally ill. If that's somehow true, he has dug himself far too deep into a hole he can never get out of. At this point, if he ever decides to say anything other than that he's queer & mentally ill, hooooly heckity are so many people gonna be peeved off (me included) because he's lead so many people to believe otherwise, and has built a career off of making people believe otherwise.
edit: apologies if this is an incoherent disaster its 4:30 am and im half dead

I'm glad you agree It's just such a grey area and really, Dan must know about it. He must know that he's taking full advantage of being so private that he can say shit without anyone being able to say one way or the other whether he's wrong to do so or not. Like, from the point of view of my sister, who is lesbian and quite involved in the community, she and a lot of others in the community view Dan and Phil as annoying queerbaiters who don't have the courage to stand up for who they are (or aren't) and rather make constant references to having male attraction that would go unnoticed by casual fans, but applauded by stans and used to keep them interested.

That's another maybe - "Dan makes constant references to liking guys, but huh, maybe he doesn't like labels so shut up and don't label hiM!!!! yoURE WRONG HE CAN'T BE QUEERBIAITNGN`!!"

Which is.... funny because you can be queer and still queerbait. You know, drop a few liners about your attraction to guys and have the fetishizing fangirls lap it up while you don't actually use your platform to help the LGBTQIA+ community or confirm that you're in it at all. (If Dan doesn't like labels, good for him, but it'd be nice if you told us that explicitly )

Wow, I'm being such a cynical bitch Also, your post was good and very coherant!!

No, he doesn't have to explain his sexuality to us. He literally does not have to do that. You cannot be queer and queerbaiting. You aren't queerbaiting because you are queer. If Dan says he likes men, guess what, he is not straight. And he does not have to say anything else because it is crystal clear what he means, even without a label. Just because you are queer does not mean you have to be an activist either. Queer people have every right to stay silent about their sexuality, not go to pride or only share as much as they feel comfortable because you are putting yourself into a vulnerable position. This includes rich people with a huge following like Dan and Phil as well. There are so many reasons not to be (fully) open about your sexuality or at least not to make a big deal out of it and all of them are valid.

And as a mentally ill person: are you really telling me I have to announce that to everyone when I make jokes? I do not feel comfortable talking about my depression and anxiety outside the anonymity of the Internet but I do feel comfortable making jokes about being depressed, death and the like. I don't want to put myself into a position where I have to tell people exactly what my medical conditions are and which pills I swallow because they are none of their business! And does this mean I am not allowed to make the jokes because someone could hear it who does not know about my mental health? I don't think so.

Wow, you need to calm down. Why talk to me like I'm not well-versed in this topic? News flash: I'm severely mentally ill too, that's why I care. And to answer your question with another one - do you think it's fair to make depression seem relatable and funny? Do you think it's fair to talk about social awkwardness so much that your followers begin to think it's the same thing as social anxiety? I'm just saying that a neurotypical person has no right to make fun out of mental illness and make it relatable and

sigh, I'm ugly and depressed lol

. Mental illness is serious and life-ruining and so many other things, I hate how it's reduced to a meme but hey, it's a coping mechanism. But you don't fucking use your platform with thousands of people watching to go on and on about lol, relatable mental illness when you never actually offer these people any support - why not include links in the description to mental health charities? - and have never told anyone that you're mentally ill. No, Alex, I don't wanna hear about the pills you swallow just like you don't wanna hear about the hospitals I've been to. But what I wanna hear from Dan? Something subtle, something "us mentally ill people" "so you know I got that social anxiety and I'm a twelve foot giraffe" - is that too much to want out of someone who's woven symptoms of mental illness into his branding? Do you know what kinda messages it sends to young people who don't have much knowledge of mental illness and begin to think these symptoms are funny or normal, because hey, Dan's laughing about it and so is everyone else.

Lmao, "you can't queerbait if you're queer" - that's your opinion, but not the one everyone in the community accepts.

Damn, I'm so annoyed at this response. We could've kept it civil but you had to start yelling at me like I'm so ignorant about queer rights and mental illness? You had to be blunt and disgusting about your personal mental illness, like I don't know what it's like? Do me a favour and look up body dysmorphic disorder and tell me why I shouldn't be pissed that Dan did a comedy short with Anthony where he told him to critise his appearance.

Feel free to ban me or whatever, I'm just.... wow. I'ma go get a drink of water

[malday]

I have to say, everytime I see the "queerbaiting" topic is about to get started again I have to leave IDB for a few days because I just can't with it anymore. I don't want to stifle discussion but there is such a thing as TOO MANY TIMES.

Same.
Maybe such a recurring topic deserves it's own thread, or maybe a debate.org thread instead so it can have an end.

[SquishPhan]

And as a mentally ill person: are you really telling me I have to announce that to everyone when I make jokes? I do not feel comfortable talking about my depression and anxiety outside the anonymity of the Internet but I do feel comfortable making jokes about being depressed, death and the like. I don't want to put myself into a position where I have to tell people exactly what my medical conditions are and which pills I swallow because they are none of their business! And does this mean I am not allowed to make the jokes because someone could hear it who does not know about my mental health? I don't think so.

As a fellow mentally ill person, no. Nobody is obligated to disclose the specifics of their mental health if they don't want to. But, I think that Dan has gotten himself into somewhat of a difficult position. A lot of mentally ill people (not necessarily me) see what he's doing (joking about social anxiety, depression, etc.) as exploitative. They think that he's only doing it to be Hastag Relatable and is somewhat glorifying it. Of course, anyone can make these jokes, with a disclosed mental illness or not, but not everybody is profiting off of these jokes like he is. That's what makes it seem a bit iffy. No, of course he doesn't have to go into a full on liveshow-esque ramble about his mental health, nor is he even obligated to share anything about his own personal mental health at all, but I feel like it might appease some people that are uncomfortable with the fact that his entire branding is based off of mental illness and he may not even be actually mentally ill.

I can never understand how people can really think such thing and yet still be a fan of Dan. If people think he would do such things then maybe they should stop watching his stuff and no longer support him.
He doesn’t have to appease (those) people at all.

Also I disagree that his entire branding is based off of mental illness.

[pilotlight]

No, he doesn't have to explain his sexuality to us. He literally does not have to do that. You cannot be queer and queerbaiting. You aren't queerbaiting because you are queer. If Dan says he likes men, guess what, he is not straight. And he does not have to say anything else because it is crystal clear what he means, even without a label. Just because you are queer does not mean you have to be an activist either. Queer people have every right to stay silent about their sexuality, not go to pride or only share as much as they feel comfortable because you are putting yourself into a vulnerable position. This includes rich people with a huge following like Dan and Phil as well. There are so many reasons not to be (fully) open about your sexuality or at least not to make a big deal out of it and all of them are valid.

This is how I feel too. I can't fault someone for not want to take on the Queer Role Model role because that's a LOT of additional pressure, scrutiny and responsibility. I am incredibly grateful for people who are willing to be leader and be out queer activists, of course, but just because you're a member of a community doesn't mean you're prepared to be some sort of public representative of it. If that's not a can of worms someone wants to open in their public life, I don't exactly blame them.

Plus, I honestly think the expectation that someone should have to formally out themselves instead of just living out isn't very fair. There's a reason why outing people against their will is considered a bad thing to do, public figure or not, so I don't get how someone can have that belief and at the same time believe people are obligated to out themselves in ways they don't want to?

[captainspacecoat]

No, he doesn't have to explain his sexuality to us. He literally does not have to do that. You cannot be queer and queerbaiting. You aren't queerbaiting because you are queer. If Dan says he likes men, guess what, he is not straight. And he does not have to say anything else because it is crystal clear what he means, even without a label. Just because you are queer does not mean you have to be an activist either. Queer people have every right to stay silent about their sexuality, not go to pride or only share as much as they feel comfortable because you are putting yourself into a vulnerable position. This includes rich people with a huge following like Dan and Phil as well. There are so many reasons not to be (fully) open about your sexuality or at least not to make a big deal out of it and all of them are valid.

And as a mentally ill person: are you really telling me I have to announce that to everyone when I make jokes? I do not feel comfortable talking about my depression and anxiety outside the anonymity of the Internet but I do feel comfortable making jokes about being depressed, death and the like. I don't want to put myself into a position where I have to tell people exactly what my medical conditions are and which pills I swallow because they are none of their business! And does this mean I am not allowed to make the jokes because someone could hear it who does not know about my mental health? I don't think so.

Good post!!!!!!! You took the words straight out of my mouth. I've said it before and I'll say it again - Dan and Phil do not owe us intimate details about their sexualities or mental health. As a closeted person, attitudes from out LGBT+ people who look down on closeted people (disclaimer: not saying dnp are necessarily closeted, and I don't love the whole concept of 'the closet' in the first place, I'm just using it here to mean 'haven't explicitly clarified their sexualities in terms most people consider indisputable') as cowardly genuinely make me feel devastated. Why are we holding LGBT+ people to some weird standard whereby we have to essentially define ourselves by our sexualities, have to constantly be at the forefront of LGBT+ activism, have to be 100% open about and comfortable with our sexualities?? Should we not instead be putting the pressure on straight/cis people to do better, to relinquish some of their privilege and stop putting us in danger and do their part to make this world a better/safer place, given that it's their fault we're marginalised in the first place?

I just do not understand how anyone can hold any amount of animosity toward people for choosing not to explicitly disclose their sexualities, and it confounds me truly that some people can't see the plethora of reasons someone may have for approaching their sexuality in a more private/personal way (first and foremost, the fact that we still live in a society where non-straight/cis people face significant danger, discrimination, judgment etc for their sexuality/gender, and it can be hard enough accepting it yourself, let alone informing other people).

And having said all of that, it seems so unnecessary to even worry about whether dnp are 'queer baiting' at this point because it's so obvious to me that they're not. If you can ignore all the many times they (especially Dan, but Phil as well albeit to a lesser/more subtle extent) have made it pretty clear that they are into dudes then you're playing yourself lmao.

Same goes for the mental health argument of course - in my view, Dan has been quite brave in live-shows this year, stating he has mental health issues, talking about social anxiety and discussing what specific scenarios/situations make his mental health worse/better. He has also said that dark humour is a coping mechanism for him - he does not ever have to share any details at all about his mental health if he doesn't want to, and to expect him to is honestly so entitled. I love that he's felt comfortable sharing even the tidbits he has, but I would never expect that of him.

tldr; I get being wary of people cashing in on sensitive topics like sexuality and mental health/exploiting them for the views, but I think it's entirely unfair to suggest anybody must demonstrate their sexuality/mental health 100% openly in order to be taken seriously as a legitimate non-straight or mentally unwell person. We should think of dnp as complex and real human beings who a) exist outside of youtube, b) are not and never will be our friends and c) do not owe us details about any aspect of their personal lives.

Also the sims vid was cute

[relatablemood]

Ugh, it's no use. I'm sorry for swearing and stuff. It just really upsets me for someone to assume that I'm not mentally ill and just being horrible and stuff. I'm not gonna come on here again.

[socksparadox]

Going back and reading my first post, it sounded like I was implying that Dan (or mentally ill people in general) were obligated to disclose details about their mental health, which was not what I meant I expressed my opinion in an awful way and my sleep-deprived brain has me wording things to imply things I don't mean. Sorry if this discussion got out of hand i'll go back into lurking shhhh