Sociopolitical Issue thread

[Catallena]

The part about a 21 year old dating a 15 year old is the most disturbing part about what you have just described. I think adults should know better than to date children. I don't think that situation in question is a part of fandom culture, I think it's an adult using an alternative subculture to prey on their victims (this is very very common). I don't know how situations like that can be prevented. I think parenting your children well is the only way, but so many parents aren't equipped to teach their children things like this? This can go into a whole other essay, haha

It happened a few years ago so even before all these 13 year olds with porn blogs popped up. It was between a 21 year old girl (well, woman) and a 15 (maybe 16) year old boy. They were both popular in the Tumblr phandom, but I don't think either are active anymore. I do remember some people thinking it was creepy and confronting her about it. Of course, their friends all thought they were sooo cute together. Her excuse was that she had more in common with 15 year olds anyway and other 'age is just a number' crap. It was implied they sexted. They broke up pretty quickly but it freaked me out pretty bad ._.

one i saw in particular had a lot of 'omg do a fic where phil makes fun of dan's small dick!!' which is just a bit... unusual when it's about 2 other people who you do not know and who probably wouldn't actually, like, approve of that.

(..)

i think having a community giving teenagers a safe space to have teenage feelings and discuss sex is good, but those sites definitely arent the spaces for that. i mean, one i saw actually tried some kind of matchmaking service at one point. it had a list of people with their ages (some of them literally 13!!!!) listing if they were dom or sub and what their kinks were and a link to their ask box

I saw that fic (or 'headcanon') and I just closed the tab and had to take a walk outside to remind myself that the planet is still okay because nah. Like if that's your personal kink that's cool I guess but the way they described it was just abusive and weird. Even worse are the 2012!phan ones, where D&P literally abuse each other physically and verbally but it's all ok because sex. Often Dan cries at the end and apologizes for his behavior, then Phil apologizes for losing his temper and it's all happy again. That's not cute, that's dangerous... And I hope these kids don't think D&P are actually like that.

I think the matchmaking thing was short lived and the blog admitted they shouldn't have done it, but the fact they even came up with it and didn't think about possible consequences proves to me they shouldn't own a blog like that at all.

[blueapple_x]

Wow I just caught up with all the posts here and I know the topic has shifted a bit but I just have to:

i think, a lot of the time, people trying to find a way to prove that they dont identify that way turn to bizarre or often offensive statements just to find another option, which is way i'm never really swayed by other opinions. so, i definitely know how i think they identify, but i can't say i definitely know how the identify. i just think i at least have a good guess

I find it really weird how people are only against labels when it comes to bisexuality. Gay, lesbian, and straight people are all labelled as such in mainstream media, while it seems that people just don't seem to include bisexuality at all. Even in OITNB, which has a lead who could very easily be called bisexual, they only once mention the word, and most of the time, it's just, "straight turned lesbian", which gets old and annoying.

honestly, I get the "don't label them" argument for Phil, because he has mentioned that he doesn't like labels, but it really annoys me when people use that argument for Dan, because he has clearly labeled himself, and people refuse to acknowledge it, which I think is something a lot of bisexual people deal with.

I mean, if you personally choose not to label them, it's okay, but it really annoys me when people try to police other people and stop them from calling Dan bisexual. It especially annoys me when people use the word gay or straight to define them, because there is definitely no proof for either.

To answer the dumbest statement I've read in a long time, however: to the person in the D&P thread - you don't understand why people need so many labels? then why criticise? if something doesn't apply to you and you can't understand it, why do you feel the need to comment and contribute to the damage?

What would happen to somebody with no gross past controversies who's also on national radio etc.? People would be falling all over themselves to get him as the perfect spokesperson for their LBGT+ cause, and dude he just wants to make videos and stay private (nevermind what a coming out of some kind from either of them would do in terms of phan-speculation/confirmation-> the two are intertwined for D&P).

As a general statement, like I’ve mentioned in the D&P thread, people should be able to label or not label themselves if they want to. To be frank I’m often annoyed at extreme opinions where people can’t accept that everyone is different and has had different experiences. Nobody should be telling other people that they shouldn’t be using labels just because you’re personally uncomfortable with them/find them ridiculous. And nobody should be forcing labels as 100% truth onto other people who haven’t ever identified as such and don’t want to be labelled at all.

Nobody can say they 100% know someone’s sexuality until they come out, but we can definitely speculate based on previous “proof” as this IS a gossip forum at the end of the day. People here aren’t calling D&P bi, etc. to their face to make them feel uncomfortable with a label. Some people may do that in their videos’ comment sections, in liveshows or at meetups, but D&P would literally have to go out of their way to come here to read people’s in-depth theories and subject themselves to uncomfortableness. Maybe that sounds a bit harsh but it’s true.

If a day comes where Dan and Phil identify themselves as bi again , that's cool, we have to respect that. If a day ever comes where they identify as something other than bi, then we have to respect that. And if a day comes where they say they don’t want to use any labels for themselves, we have to respect that as well. Until then (and if none of the above happen) there’s no way of knowing what they identify with (or don’t) in their personal lives. People mostly refer to them as bi because that is what they have called themselves (even Phil, despite him saying he didn't like labels, he still called himself bi more than once) and have never taken back despite all the gay denials and implied straightness.

Nowadays, they’re expressing attraction to both males and females (mainly Dan though) which is congruent to what they previously said about being bi. If you (speaking generally here) feel uncomfortable with calling them bi but accept the fact that you think they’re attracted to males and females, that’s fine. Just please don’t tell anyone else that they can’t speculate by using the bi label for them. And vice versa. If someone is uncomfortable with saying "I think they’re bi" for whatever reason but they believe both are attracted to males and females, let them be.

[jess]

So I feel the need to explain my thoughts about labels & how they can be both wonderful & problematic. I have come to accept that I am an odd case who hates labeling anything (music genres, relationships, sexuality, gender, etc.). I literally had a phase where I changed every single musical artist's genre in my iTunes to genres that were specific to me (Radiohead were "purest love", Fiona Apple is "beautifully awkward", etc.); most of my songs are still catalogued that way because I detest seeing (society imposed) genres in my digital music collection. In a less silly example, I have ruined my share of friendships/relationships with my lack of hard lines in a good deal of my human interactions. I don't want to be told how I should interact with another person based on boxes society tells me I need to place people in. Most people need to label relationships: you are a friend, you are a lover, you are my girlfriend, you are my enemy. I don't operate that way. People are just people in my life. Some people I can fall into & out of sleeping with them, romantic entanglements with them, hating them, & just being "friends." I've learned which people I can have fluid relationships with & which ones I need to clearly state my intentions (or lack of intentions) with every time the tide changes for me. I have also massively disappointed & hurt people more times than I'd like to admit because my actions led them to believe they had a certain status in my life that I did not actually assign to them myself. I'm not a consistent person. Because of this I'm pretty much complete shite at keeping friends at this point in my life. I just don't care enough about anything or I care far too fucking much & I'm fickle as fuck when it comes to other humans. I just don't like putting things in boxes & I want everything to be fluid, which I understand is scary & unreasonable to most people. I thrive on chaos, contradiction, & what others might call confusion. That is just how I am.

So with that long ass introduction, onto the sexuality labels: I absolutely love that there are an array of labels & that people can choose what to label themselves as they see fit. I do have problems with people making blanket statements about other people who have yet officially come out as anything. I understand that most of the wanting to label D&P is relatively harmless & mostly well-intentioned. For me, it doesn't change the fact that neither one of them have actually stated a sexuality in years & back when they did, they likely weren't thinking that they'd be touring the world with millions of followers. I just don't think it is fair to put a label on someone until they are comfortable with that label & choose to place it (& keep it) on themselves. I'll be very happy if/when the day comes that one or both of them chooses to have serious discussion about sexuality & come out as whatever sexuality they individually settle on. Until then, I'll speculate in my head, but never place Dan or Phil in any sexuality box.

On the whole, I think where labels can become problematic at times is when people feel pressured to label themselves when they are not necessarily ready or wanting to do so. Because of the array of labels out there, I feel like a good deal of people feel even more of a need to fit in & know exactly where they fall on the spectrum. This can sometimes cause even more confusion, anger, & hurt for that individual. Some of us revel in being confusing & contradictory as fuck, but I completely understand that others really struggle & want to find (a) label(s) that fit(s) them. I also don't see anything wrong with being consistent with your label(s), changing your label(s), or never wanting to be labeled. I think that we all have masculine, feminine, & gender neutral aspects to our personalities, physical manifestations, & essences. I want everyone to be able to embrace all of those aspects & qualities no matter how they choose or not choose to self-identify. In the example of Dan, he has outright said he was bi in the past, he has said he's "not gay" in the more recent past, & he has also explicitly stated that he doesn't really understand why people are so obsessed with labeling people's sexuality. All of these things can be interpreted a variety of different ways & I think that's what leads to so many arguments in the D&P realm (I really hate saying phandom!). I personally do think that Dan is likely bi (just like I think he & Phil are likely in a relationship), but I will never say that I know Dan's sexuality until he decides to share that with us creeps.

[blueapple_x]

Thanks for your post jess! It was interesting to read.

I understand that most of the wanting to label D&P is relatively harmless & mostly well-intentioned. For me, it doesn't change the fact that neither one of them have actually stated a sexuality in years & back when they did, they likely weren't thinking that they'd be touring the world with millions of followers. I just don't think it is fair to put a label on someone until they are comfortable with that label & choose to place it (& keep it) on themselves.

I think there’s a huge difference between 'disliking/not using labels for yourself at all' and 'knowing/using a label for yourself privately but not wanting to share it publically' (btw I'm not saying you said this). Nobody knows what the case is with D&P. The fact that they haven’t said anything recently doesn’t mean anything other than they don’t want to share certain aspects of themselves with their audience anymore. They’re just content with dropping hints.

Look at Ingrid and Joey for example. They realized what they identified with and they eventually became comfortable with labelling themselves. However, they didn’t share that label with the public until they were ready to. Maybe this is D&P's case, maybe it isn't. Nobody knows. I agree that it’s not fair to make definite statements before a person confirms anything. And in D&P's tricky case, until they confirm, correct or clarify it again. May seem a bit unfortunate that they would have to do it again but since they're purposely ambiguous now and refrain from making definite statements, that's literally what it would take. If they never do that, that's fine too and completely up to them.

On the whole, I think where labels can become problematic at times is when people feel pressured to label themselves when they are not necessarily ready or wanting to do so. Because of the array of labels out there, I feel like a good deal of people feel even more of a need to fit in & know exactly where they fall on the spectrum. This can sometimes cause even more confusion, anger, & hurt for that individual. Some of us revel in being confusing & contradictory as fuck, but I completely understand that others really struggle & want to find (a) label(s) that fit(s) them. I also don't see anything wrong with being consistent with your label(s), changing your label(s), or never wanting to be labeled. I think that we all have masculine, feminine, & gender neutral aspects to our personalities, physical manifestations, & essences. I want everyone to be able to embrace all of those aspects & qualities no matter how they choose or not choose to self-identify.

Thank you for being able to see both sides!

In the example of Dan, he has outright said he was bi in the past, he has said he's "not gay" in the more recent past, & he has also explicitly stated that he doesn't really understand why people are so obsessed with labeling people's sexuality. All of these things can be interpreted a variety of different ways & I think that's what leads to so many arguments in the D&P realm (I really hate saying phandom!). I personally do think that Dan is likely bi (just like I think he & Phil are likely in a relationship), but I will never say that I know Dan's sexuality until he decides to share that with us creeps

Agreed! This is a gossip forum so we can only say we think or strongly suspect. Not that we know. Because things do change and nobody knows what’s happening in D&P’s minds. I just think some people get emphatic/enthusiastic and prematurely claim to know their current sexualities based on past direct statements and the lack of directly taking it back. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with speculation though. It’s pretty much a given. It’s going to happen. Especially with a past like D&P’s. Not many public figures come out and then go back in the closet/change to being ambiguous.

Like someone said in the main D&P thread, labels can empower and disempower!

[Violet Witch]

I also don't enjoy labeling people and I think shipping real life people can be dangerous (This is coming from someone who was once in the 1D fandom where shipping got ugly) But, Phan is different to me because you can't really ignore the past.

I think we as a society have put so much emphasis on labels, and while feeling like you belong is a great thing, I think people become with obsessed with it and make it their whole identity. As someone who is struggling with her sexuality, I believe sexuality is fluid a lot of the time. Again, this is just me.

On another note, I worry that tumblr fans can be gross with shipping and make it seem like guys can't be emotional and affectionate with each other platonically. If 2 girls were to hug each other and joke around while saying things like "I love you!", nobody would really care, but when 2 guys do it, they automatically have to be gay. I think it's a harmful attitude. I have one male friend who says that he refuses to compliment other males on anything because he doesn't want to be considered "gay". It just reinforces the whole "male masculinity standards", that men have to fit into these 2 boxes.

I'm probably rambling, but I'm enjoying reading what everyone else is saving

[trashqueen]

I personally search for a label because I am MISERABLE not fitting into society. I'm 28 and desperate for a family, and basically suicidal because of how lonely I am. THAT is why I search for 'the perfect 20 labels' - to see if there is anyone else on earth who feels how I feel, every damn fucking day of my life. the entirety of every human society revolves around partners, babies, and family - no man is an island. I can't escape what makes me feel alien, even though I desperately want to be a part of it. do you know what that contradiction feels like?

maybe the reason people 'obsess' over Dan and Phil's sexualities is out of desperation and sadness to feel less alone, more than any niche need to fetishize for sexual pleasure, or feel trendy being part of a 'fad'.

all the thanks, all of them

i was avoiding this thread because i was terrified of what might had been said here considering some of the posts on the main thread literally made me want to jump at people's throats

but surprisingly everyone who seems to care enough about these topics to post here also seems to know their shit and have reasonable arguments, good, i love discussing stuff like this as long as i don't feel personally attacked

i understand why some of you don't like sticking labels on them, and that's great, you do you, but i think it's important to remember that it's harmless, comes from a good place, makes sense considering the background information we have, and above all, i don't think they (or dan) would care

as i always said they are socially aware people and probably understand why other lgbt people are labeling them, and if they ever explicitly said they don't like labels or that they just identify as queer or not-straight or anything, i think most people would respect that

re the word 'queer': this is something i always struggle with, i like using it as an umbrella term because to be truly inclusive the lgbt+ acronym should be 27 letters long, but my first language isn't english which means i've never seen it used as an slur, so idk if i'm speaking out of place

for example, one of my online bffs from australia (who's also bi) hates it and although she respects other people using it to refer to themselves if they feel comfortable with it, she doesn't like people using it to refer to her or the community as a whole, and that's 100% respectable, and she, as an english speaker, should be more of an authority than me

but at the same time i use spanish 'homophobic' slurs all the time (mostly jokingly with my other queer friends) so maybe if i'm cool w the ones that i've seen used to insult people then it's okay if i use 'queer' idk man it's complicated

re fanfiction: i think smut is problematic and unrealistic af, in the same way porn is, but idk, i trust the tweens to know the difference between fantasy and real life, mostly bc fanfiction gave me 'the talk' (literally never talked about sex with my parents and we barely mentioned it at school) and i managed to end up being a reasonably educated person imo (maybe a tiny bit kinky but oh well)

that doesn't mean that i don't think the bad things about it shouldn't be addressed, i have even seen a few informative posts going around tumblr about bdsm and stuff, but i don't think it's that worrying

idk i'm just team 'don't underestimate teenage girls'

although gonna be honest i am always shocked when i see that some of the kids who run smut blogs are like 14, but most of them seem to have their shit together if you read the more 'serious' asks they answer about their age and stuff, and at the same time i can't help but go 'jfc who are you judging u were also reading smut at 14 chill' @ myself

anyways, i'm glad this thread exists

[PolarFox]

To the queer discussion: I think it's necerssary or at least would be nice, to reclaim The term, but I wouldn't stick it on anyone unless they say they're okay with it as trash queen mentioned.
For example, I sometimes use some czech slurs to label myself or joke, but they still feel very uncomfortable and irk me the wrong way - but I'm trying, at least for myself, go the reclamation way and grow thicker skin against these slurs because I hear them alot, even from my family about other people. And they don't even know I'm standing there in semitransparent closet.

[jhamba]

re fanfiction: i think smut is problematic and unrealistic af, in the same way porn is, but idk, i trust the tweens to know the difference between fantasy and real life, mostly bc fanfiction gave me 'the talk' (literally never talked about sex with my parents and we barely mentioned it at school) and i managed to end up being a reasonably educated person imo (maybe a tiny bit kinky but oh well)

that doesn't mean that i don't think the bad things about it shouldn't be addressed, i have even seen a few informative posts going around tumblr about bdsm and stuff, but i don't think it's that worrying

idk i'm just team 'don't underestimate teenage girls'

although gonna be honest i am always shocked when i see that some of the kids who run smut blogs are like 14, but most of them seem to have their shit together if you read the more 'serious' asks they answer about their age and stuff, and at the same time i can't help but go 'jfc who are you judging u were also reading smut at 14 chill' @ myself

exactly this. kids are smarter than you think they are. But, while I fully support them, and think they should do whatever they want, I still get worried sometimes, haha.

[blueapple_x]

i understand why some of you don't like sticking labels on them, and that's great, you do you, but i think it's important to remember that it's harmless, comes from a good place, makes sense considering the background information we have, and above all, i don't think they (or dan) would care

as i always said they are socially aware people and probably understand why other lgbt people are labeling them, and if they ever explicitly said they don't like labels or that they just identify as queer or not-straight or anything, i think most people would respect that

Very true. You made some good points. Until D or P state they don't wished to be labelled bi, I don't think it's so offensive to refer to them (here, or in other gossip forums where it's not being forced upon their eyes unless they purposely go looking for it) as something they explicitly identified with in the past multiple times in different places and never explicitly took back. And like you said, I'm pretty sure most people here would respect it if they one day decided to make a more definite/explicit statement once and for all because hopefully nobody here wants to force a label onto them that they explicitly rejected/said they don't identify with.

I try to stick to the "I think" statements rather than the "I know" statements because it saves me the trouble of having to clarify that I'm obviously always speaking in hypotheticals (like how people do with phan....)

[teamug]

labeling: I avoid doing it to myself, because I know me and I don't know me. Also, in some ways I've reached a point of not caring or wanting to label myself. It's not some enlightened or idgaf moment, but rather, this is me, that is not me, here I be. I think it's a lot of pressure to find a label and honestly, the many labels have made me feel more excluded and distant during times of seeking a group to belong to.
Labeling others, I've always thought of it as having more to do with the person doing the labeling, than the labeled. It could be seeking representation, projecting your own inquiries. So often it seems as if labeling is done with the intent of proving some narrative, or agenda. As if when one door opens a crack, all others must be slammed shut.
Yound minds online: I think it's great that they have a space to explore and express, but I hope they do not isolate themselves and gain a limited narrative. I was about to say that there is a pressure to mature when you are still young, but I think it might be more of appearing mature, and I don't mean just physically, but emotionally as well. People seem to realize that kids are still kids, and yet, they will expect these same kids to handle situations they could not be prepared for. At the same time, these kids have been exposed to so much more than when I was a kid, and they are better informed, just don't know if they understand all that information they have. btw, by kid, i mean ages pre-teen and teen (so 12ish to end of teendom).

[jess]

I think there’s a huge difference between 'disliking/not using labels for yourself at all' and 'knowing/using a label for yourself privately but not wanting to share it publically' (btw I'm not saying you said this).

I might not have said it, but I very much agree with it. It is every person's right to not want to be labeled in one situation, but to also be ok with being labeled in another or to label them-self privately. I don't like the fact that this occurs most often because of societal pressure to be one thing or another, but I respect that there are very real concerns for people that can stem from from a whole variety of factors: internal, family, friends, fans, society in general, etc. We all have a right to identify or not identify as we choose in every aspect of our lives. But now we're really heading into power territory, so I'll leave this here before that tangent takes flight.

re fanfiction: i think smut is problematic and unrealistic af, in the same way porn is, but idk, i trust the tweens to know the difference between fantasy and real life, mostly bc fanfiction gave me 'the talk' (literally never talked about sex with my parents and we barely mentioned it at school) and i managed to end up being a reasonably educated person imo (maybe a tiny bit kinky but oh well)

Totally veering into new territory... but I wonder how many of us never actually had "the talk" with anyone? I was raised in an odd family where I was basically allowed to be my strange self without judgement or much reigning in, but we never did (& still never do!) talk about sex. I've never even wanted to broach the subject with my family & they've never attempted to broach it with me, so it is just one of those things we've basically ignored. My "talk" wasn't with fanfiction... quite honestly, I don't even really remember how I discovered the ins & outs of sex. All I knew was that no one in my family was gonna talk to me about it, so I was gonna have to figure that out on my own. Oddly, my family has also never asked me about relationships, who I'm sleeping with, or any of that either. When I was younger I guess they just trusted me to make my own choices & knew if I ever needed to talk about anything, I'd bring it up myself. I never asked my mother when I was allowed to date or anything like that. I just started doing things (I was a sneaky little fuck back then). I think my mother & my sister have definitely suspected or figured that I have been involved with person x or person y at different times, but they also just know that if I ever decide to try become a normal human & really try to date someone again, I'll probably tell them about it.

& there's nothing wrong with a little flare in your sexual preferences, trashqueen. Life without kinks is boring as fuck, if you ask me (no judgements to you vanilla beans though ).

[alittledizzy]

re fanfiction: i think smut is problematic and unrealistic af, in the same way porn is, but idk, i trust the tweens to know the difference between fantasy and real life, mostly bc fanfiction gave me 'the talk' (literally never talked about sex with my parents and we barely mentioned it at school) and i managed to end up being a reasonably educated person imo (maybe a tiny bit kinky but oh well)

that doesn't mean that i don't think the bad things about it shouldn't be addressed, i have even seen a few informative posts going around tumblr about bdsm and stuff, but i don't think it's that worrying

idk i'm just team 'don't underestimate teenage girls'

although gonna be honest i am always shocked when i see that some of the kids who run smut blogs are like 14, but most of them seem to have their shit together if you read the more 'serious' asks they answer about their age and stuff, and at the same time i can't help but go 'jfc who are you judging u were also reading smut at 14 chill' @ myself

anyways, i'm glad this thread exists

I actually really, both retrospectively for myself and for current teens, see a lot of value in fanfiction at that age. It normalizes a lot of things that teenage girls are taught by society to be ashamed of - their own sexuality, obviously, but also the idea that they can have control in a relationship, or that they're allowed to want things with confidence. Obviously fourteen year olds don't need to run out and start practicing BDSM, but it is a safe environment to learn in and I'm definitely team 'don't underestimate teenage girls.'

[greatnessflicker]

Okay, typed this all up in the main thread and decided that it would be better here, since this place seems to be one where we can look at fandom from a meta view. Also, my argument just wasn't worth the merit the main thread awards.

This is all re: tumblr's supposed single response to dan's expressed male attraction
***
okay, i'm totally cool with dropping this subject AND i'd be uncomfortable if this starts something incendiary, but I would like to become a member of the tumblr defense squad for a second. I'll try to keep my emotions out of it, but I will just say I have a personal bias to tumblr, and I held off from joining gg for so long cause it seemed like everyone hated tumblr. WHICH IS RIDICULOUS, because tumblr is a million different communities of very different people, and I think this drama that is occurring within the dan and phil fandom but between its different varieties shows that. Also, tumblr is more self-aware than we give them credit for. a lot of people there are sick of the "don't assume anything" discourse, as well.

That said, I do understand "tumblr" acts as shorthand, that the website attracts certain kinds of people more than other kinds, that it is a very different website than IDB (I recognize that bc I came to IDB, for, well, more in-depth discussions than I felt like i was getting on tumblr). However, I don't think it makes sense to classify the differences that may crop up in ideology by which social media platform is used. After all, we've had the discussion plenty of times of whether dan's "openness" towards his sexuality is fanservice/baiting, etc (not that it can't be genuine and fanservice as well), with people here making similar claims as to what people on tumblr are saying.

With that said, here's just a sampling of posts I've seen on my dashboard that characterize tumblr as a more nuanced group of people

"he shouldn’t have to say “i am bisexual” (or any other label) in order for that to be accepted, and tbh i think more people should just accept what he says as his personal opinions [...] because people don’t need to “come out” in order for their identities to be valid"

i’m not sure it’s even assumptions at this point ; the only sexuality dan has identified with is bisexuality, i know he has then strongly implied straightness, etc, but come on this isn’t 2012 anymore, he’s been practically “out” for a while now (constantly stating attracting for males on younow, even at conventions and on DAPG..) so the way i see it the anime video is his way of being out on the DINOF channel without making a big deal out of it. but now, if anybody still thinks he is straight, well im afraid i can’t help you haha

everyone: im so happy dans comfortable enough to freely express attraction towards guys!!

a Bitter individual: ur all rude for assuming things, he hasnt Literally Sucked a Dick on camera so we dont really know :/

ALSO, I'm aware everyone on this site is intelligent enough to understand this, but I just felt like it needed to be said.

Overall, I just think the way we refer to tumblr here is indicative of the same problems that occur in any type of community that operates as a smaller segment of society (the in-group fighting that happens in feminist and LGBT movements, for example, that is invisible to those outside those communities). I wrote this post partially bc I find it so, so interesting how different groups of people perceive other groups of people and where the identity of a community breaks down bc of all its disparate parts.

Anyways, we took the piss out of the tumblr user who said gg was a bunch of middle aged nose pervents bc it was so blatantly false that it was hilarious, so perhaps we can imagine tumblr as complexly as we'd like them to imagine us (i say as i make flower crowns for a group of children sitting in a circle, holding hands, singing Kumbaya)

ok, the more i think about it, the more i realize that perhaps truly the main thread is not conflating tumblr with the dan-defense-squad, and that this post doesn't need to exist, BUT i did just spend twenty minutes typing it, so...pls dont hate me.

[internetakeover]

I just have to start off with a million to pretty much everyone who's already posted on this thread - if I started quoting/naming I'd never stop! (though I will say to greatnessflicker specifically, as you posted while I was typing! tumblr is probably my primary fandom space and that does sometimes bother me too. everything is shades of grey! imagine people(/communities) complexly!) do i need to warn for JG?

I actually hadn't checked this thread out before today b/c I was afraid it would be a shit storm, but it's been an absolutely wonderful read! I made a tumblr post about my thoughts on the dialogue around Dan's latest videos and wanted to share it over here (after alittledizzy validated me and I now think it makes any sense). I'll put it under a spoiler because it is a bit long and backtracking discussion a little (though there is some labelling chat in there):

(link to the original post if you care, this is edited a tiny bit but is essentially the same)

there seem to almost be two sides of things - ‘okay Dan came out he’s definitely bi’ or ‘we can’t apply labels to him without a firm/clear statement’, and as usual i think the truth/where i’m personally sitting lies somewhere in the middle. i wouldn’t call the last two videos/his male attraction mentions generally a coming out, but as I'm definitely on board with what oqua said over on the main thread about him just being out? those have been firm and clear statements in themselves, even if not statements of an identity - which would be a massive deal and attract attention beyond just his viewing community, which he might not want.

i think it’s important not to ignore that those statements are important and do mean something in attempts not to forcibly apply an unwanted label to him? and obviously that shit can come from a heteronormative place and get bi/homophobic real fast, but i definitely understand where it’s coming from and personally felt that much more before he had dropped so many male attraction mentions, and on such public platforms - i mean the abs thing was on dinof, the biggest platform he has, he’s only really been saying things more explicitly and on bigger platforms, and he knows how people are responding to that. he knows full well about the conversations we’re having right now, and he doesn’t seem to be backing down.

given his history of male attraction statements, and how they’ve been getting bolder, it does seem that dan is comfortable being seen as not-straight, if that’s not something he actively wants and is kind of working towards. i get that that feels like a big thing, but the dini speedos thing was so clear, and linked to from his main, and again - he knows what saying stuff like that makes people think. he’s putting male attraction mentions out there, and while i don’t want to say he’s inviting people to break down and analyse his sexuality (which i’m possibly doing, oops!), he’s not marking it as off limits anymore, if that makes sense? he knows what’s going on, he’s not stupid, and he’s continuing it knowing that.

from the idea that he wants to be perceived as not-straight the label bi would seem to apply, given his previous statements, but as much as i’ve used that casually in tags/conversation i do get that that feels like a massive thing to do without recent confirmation. that said, i don’t think it’s unreasonable to talk about the possibility of him being bi in fandom spaces, though i might not run up to him in the street or even down in comments and yell ‘you’re bi!’ in his face. it’s a discussion of things he’s shown us rather than a forced labelling in that way? *cough*British media*cough*Tom Daley*cough*George Shelley*cough* but yeah labels can be touchy and i’ve been wavering about this last bit, partially because i know have a level of personal investment as a bi person to whom representation is important, so. there’s that. (feelings talk, oops!)

tl;dr: while dan can’t be said to have ‘come out’ the amount he’s talked about being attracted to men seems deliberate and shouldn’t be dismissed just because it isn’t a labelling statement, and also labels are difficult.

Loving the discussion about the term queer too, I personally really love it - and am quite fond of my labels generally, very much agree with previous mentions of them giving a sense of community etc etc - but because it is/was a slur I find it hard to use around cishet people? Because they probably shouldn't be using it? (And annoyingly that's where I'd most like to use it because I don't feel 100% comfortable coming out as non binary/agender irl but using 'queer' makes me feel like I'm including all my identities without having to name them.) In addition to that, it is hard to know if it's appropriate to use the term as a catch all for the LGBTQ+ community - because of it's history it's probably not, really, but everything other term has little niggles, so I definitely do use it when talking to queer friends who I know are comfortable with it, though I'm more careful in 'public' spaces.

I'm definitely on team 'don't underestimate teenage girls' too!! I think fandom is a great place for discussion of things like this, because there is often a recognition/author's note if there are problematic elements, which might not be so present in porn, and the presence of smut etc as kind of normalised in fan communities also means people find it easier to discuss any questions etc they might have? It's definitely better than standard visual porn, though I recognise that there can be issues with smut too. Also, with regards to the maturity discussion, idk if anyone else has noticed/thought about this, but I think if kids find things they're not ready for, they just won't read it? I accidentally got what was essentially a BDSM erotica book hidden under a werewolf romance out of the library at age 11 and did read the whole thing, but once I'd finished it I just returned it and went about my life - though in retrospect, there were some kind of fucked up things in there, which were not handily tagged/noted as being so. I mean, clearly it's stuck with me to a degree as I do remember it, but I just sort of moved on and stuck to things I was ready for after that. I think kids are probably pretty resilient or almost self limiting in that way (hopefully!), and again things are pretty much always well tagged/warned if they do contain smut, so it's harder to accidentally stumble on things, though of course not impossible.

[trashqueen]

not quoting bc phones are evil when it comes to forums but i completely agree with tumblr not being as bad as we make it seem, i'm personally not a big fan of the phandom side of things (maybe i just have a tendency to find the annoying side of it idk), in the same way i can't stand the supernatural/sherlock/doctor who fandom (ok the phandom is nowhere near that bad soz phandom) but as a whole tumblr is great, it's the only place i know where you're not a minority while being a minority and that feels amazing and it does wonders educating people simply through empathy, because yeah, there's a lot of info posts about social issues which are great and useful, but i think the reason everyone cares so much about so many things it's because it's hard not to care about trans issues (for example) when this person you've been following for years suffers because of that, or you know, war in the middle east looks like something so far away it sometimes feels fictional, until you read about the experience first hand from someone on tumblr. tumblr shows in a way, with its issues and all*, the good side of globalization

*i think tumblr's biggest issue is the extreme side of social justice, you know the whole 'this celebrity is the best person in the world let's idolize her' *celebrity says one bad thing* 'she's the WORST and needs to DIE', or the pulling up receipts on people from years ago when they clearly don't think that way anymore, as if people weren't allowed to educate themselves and change their mind.

i blame that on young teens not realizing that people can learn and change because they hadn't experienced it themselves, kids around 15 now weren't really on the internet when everything was offensive and problematic (i mean even tumblr in 2011 was a complete different world! all the slut shaming and 'i'm not like other girls' that happened there was unbelievable) and probably don't think that if they had been around back then they would have been like that

[mamaphan]

This was my dumb comment that started this and I feel so shitty that I had hurt peoples feelings that was not my intention at all.

I get that some people want to have representation, but for me I dont need someone to label themselves and its so hard for people these days because they feel they have to put a definition on who they are as sexual beings but maybe because I am older I dont see the need. There is so much more to each of us than who we are attracted to.
My wish is that one day there is no labels and no assumptions, that we are all just beautiful humans with different ways of thinking and feeling, emotionally and sexually with out judgment.


I should of expressed myself better but I am not as good with expressing my thoughts clearly, as so many of you do. I 100% see the need for people to have a label. We all have different ways of thinking and feeling, and right now I am in this stage of my life where I am just focusing on raising my teenage daughter. So for me in my life personally right now I do not need a label. My heart hurts for anyone who is lost and confused and wants representation, I do understand. And I am so sorry if I made you feel upset, hurt, or angry.
I promise that I will take more care with my words

[cucu]

Concerning the q-slur... having only ever heard that word in a negative context outside of the internet, I can't help but dislike it immensely. I'm absolutely fine with other lgbtq+ people using that term as and when they wish, yet I personally would never use that label for myself as it just makes me so, so uncomfortable. I also immensely dislike how it's become the norm in tumblr culture and other lgbt spaces to refer to anyone non-het or non-cis as "q*eer" as a blanket term. It irks me particularly as I feel like other people don't factor in that some of us aren't just aren't okay with being labelled that term? Regarding a slur, I just feel like it's simply not okay to refer to others using the slur unless they express they are okay with it. Reclaiming the q-word yourself is fine, however it isn't fair to just slap the label on anybody else because it doesn't make you feel uncomfortable. It's also increasingly frustrating that the reclamation of the word makes some straight allies feel like they can use it - because, no. Just no.

[coffee pig]

Concerning the q-slur... having only ever heard that word in a negative context outside of the internet, I can't help but dislike it immensely. I'm absolutely fine with other lgbtq+ people using that term as and when they wish, yet I personally would never use that label for myself as it just makes me so, so uncomfortable. I also immensely dislike how it's become the norm in tumblr culture and other lgbt spaces to refer to anyone non-het or non-cis as "q*eer" as a blanket term. It irks me particularly as I feel like other people don't factor in that some of us aren't just aren't okay with being labelled that term? Regarding a slur, I just feel like it's simply not okay to refer to others using the slur unless they express they are okay with it. Reclaiming the q-word yourself is fine, however it isn't fair to just slap the label on anybody else because it doesn't make you feel uncomfortable. It's also increasingly frustrating that the reclamation of the word makes some straight allies feel like they can use it - because, no. Just no.

I use the term 'queer' quite a lot simply because it flows off the tongue better than LGBT+ and I never realized that it still had such a negative connotation for some people. Thank you for opening my eyes, I'll probably be a bit more cautious from now on. I think it's because I was raised in a very liberal environment around academics, and the term 'queer' is used quite often in academia, for instance in referring to LGBT+ texts as 'queer' literature. My aunt actually teaches a module called Queer Histories, so I've heard the term used more often in my life in an impartial, technical term than as a slur.

[cucu]

Concerning the q-slur... having only ever heard that word in a negative context outside of the internet, I can't help but dislike it immensely. I'm absolutely fine with other lgbtq+ people using that term as and when they wish, yet I personally would never use that label for myself as it just makes me so, so uncomfortable. I also immensely dislike how it's become the norm in tumblr culture and other lgbt spaces to refer to anyone non-het or non-cis as "q*eer" as a blanket term. It irks me particularly as I feel like other people don't factor in that some of us aren't just aren't okay with being labelled that term? Regarding a slur, I just feel like it's simply not okay to refer to others using the slur unless they express they are okay with it. Reclaiming the q-word yourself is fine, however it isn't fair to just slap the label on anybody else because it doesn't make you feel uncomfortable. It's also increasingly frustrating that the reclamation of the word makes some straight allies feel like they can use it - because, no. Just no.

I use the term 'queer' quite a lot simply because it flows off the tongue better than LGBT+ and I never realized that it still had such a negative connotation for some people. Thank you for opening my eyes, I'll probably be a bit more cautious from now on. I think it's because I was raised in a very liberal environment around academics, and the term 'queer' is used quite often in academia, for instance in referring to LGBT+ texts as 'queer' literature. My aunt actually teaches a module called Queer Histories, so I've heard the term used more often in my life in an impartial, technical term than as a slur.

I'm aware of the heavy usage of the q-term in academia, and it always seemed a little... strange to me? Most of the people around me growing up always only knew the word as a slur, and honestly I had no clue it had been 'reclaimed' by some until around two years a go. I have no issue with anybody lgbt+ using the word, however it does make me wince slightly when I see it used as a blanket term in academia by... straight people, i suppose. The issue also rises when you have publications such as the Huffington Post changing "lgbt voices" to "queer voices" - I completely understand that it is a more general term that covers all non-straight/non-cis bases, however I think it's a bit ignorant to actual lgbt+ people that regard it as a slur. Yet, that may just be because of my personal sensitivities - I know that regarding queer as a slur is becoming a bit of an "old-age" opinion lol (even if I am only 19, my soul is old. )

[jhamba]

I'm aware of the heavy usage of the q-term in academia, and it always seemed a little... strange to me? Most of the people around me growing up always only knew the word as a slur, and honestly I had no clue it had been 'reclaimed' by some until around two years a go. I have no issue with anybody lgbt+ using the word, however it does make me wince slightly when I see it used as a blanket term in academia by... straight people, i suppose. The issue also rises when you have publications such as the Huffington Post changing "lgbt voices" to "queer voices" - I completely understand that it is a more general term that covers all non-straight/non-cis bases, however I think it's a bit ignorant to actual lgbt+ people that regard it as a slur. Yet, that may just be because of my personal sensitivities - I know that regarding queer as a slur is becoming a bit of an "old-age" opinion lol (even if I am only 19, my soul is old. )

UNPOPULAR OPINION TIME

Maybe I'm an old school feminist, or something, but I really don't appreciate the way queer theory disregards gender entirely, as if it doesn't exist, or that saying that someone is a man or a woman is an outdated category. I mean, I think queer theory isn't rooted in politics, while my particular feminism, is rooted in political beliefs.

I mean, I don't think of myself as a TERF, although I do think that men and women are socialized differently, and while I think the trans community has it's issues, I don't think the socialization of transmen and cismen is the same, or the socialization of transwomen and ciswomen is the same. I am not trying to take away from the trans community having issues, but, I am saying that their problems are different from cis people's (and often worse), which I think for me is easily tackled by intersectionality, instead of queer theory (which means, to me, feminism should be dealing with trans issues). I think these categories are important when it comes to how someone is socialized, and the kind of things they deal with in life (which is the biggest reason gender or sexuality matters to me).

So, I guess my problem with queer theory is that it can be really vague, and often contradicts radical feminism (which is what I am, according to the dictionary definition, I'm not a second waver, though, I'm intersectional), in that it puts a lot of responsibility on the individual in terms of how they think about gender and sexuality (which is important, but when it's used to silence social concerns, it's annoying as hell), and I feel like it glosses over a lot of real life issues, just because of how "gender is an outdated concept", which is something I disagree with, because it is still a concept that exists in society, which queer theory doesn't really help with, imo.

TL;DR I think queer theory isn't political enough and too vague for me, and the fact that it's so popular makes me annoyed

(I want someone to change my mind, bc I really want to like queer theory, but it just tends to annoy me?)

(also, an umbrella term would be nice, but they could have used another word instead of queer? It's like if feminist theory were called "bitch theory", which would suck.)

[alex]

(I'm typing this on my phone, so please bear with me.)

I do think there are positive aspects to queer theory, like the fact that it challenges heteronormativity, which is obviously a good thing, as long as labels are not completely abolished and those who find comfort in them, relate to others because of them, etc. are free to use them. As has been stated before in this thread, labels can do both evil and good. I personally have a complicated relationship with labels, because while I use them, I'm still not sure whether I use them as a way to accept myself and relate to others, or whether I use them to justify being the way I am. Regardless, I think it is human nature to want to relate and fit in somewhere, and if labels can do that for people that is wonderful. Heteronormativity, however, is a massive problem (which, to me, anyone insisting that Dan is straight suffers from) that needs to go. But aside from labelling in itself being human nature, the tendency to have a default label probably also is.

Regarding the gender aspect of queer theory and how it interferes with radical feminism (or feminism in general): I like queer theory, and I largely agree with the idea that gender is performative (not a performance, just to be clear) and constructed by society. I think your point, Jhambs, that people belonging to the same gender but a different sex are socialised differently, underlines this. However, I like it as a thought experiment, not as a realistic political ideal. Gender categories are such an ingrained part of society that the idea that it does not exist at all is too theoretical and too idealistic. We may have constructed these categories ourselves, but before we can get rid of them (if we can, at all, which I don't believe is realistic) we need to use them to destroy the power structures that came with them, first.

I always have a bit of a knee jerk response to radical feminism, because most of my conversations have been with TERFs, who not only do not include trans individuals in their idea of feminism (which is a problem, because, and I realise this is a gross generalisation, transwomen generally suffer more ridicule and discrimination than transmen, because of misogyny) but also tend to be deeply transphobic. One TERF I used to speak too basically could have proposed the North Carolina bathroom bill herself, as people with penises (aka transwomen) should not be in their bathrooms, but transmen are also traitors to the sisterhood, etc. But I have no idea what percentage of radical feminists are TERFs, and (intersectional) radical feminism in itself is a good political philosophy.

[jhamba]

(I'm typing this on my phone, so please bear with me.)

I do think there are positive aspects to queer theory, like the fact that it challenges heteronormativity, which is obviously a good thing, as long as labels are not completely abolished and those who find comfort in them, relate to others because of them, etc. are free to use them. As has been stated before in this thread, labels can do both evil and good. I personally have a complicated relationship with labels, because while I use them, I'm still not sure whether I use them as a way to accept myself and relate to others, or whether I use them to justify being the way I am. Regardless, I think it is human nature to want to relate and fit in somewhere, and if labels can do that for people that is wonderful. Heteronormativity, however, is a massive problem (which, to me, anyone insisting that Dan is straight suffers from) that needs to go. But aside from labelling in itself being human nature, the tendency to have a default label probably also is.

Regarding the gender aspect of queer theory and how it interferes with radical feminism (or feminism in general): I like queer theory, and I largely agree with the idea that gender is performative (not a performance, just to be clear) and constructed by society. I think your point, Jhambs, that people belonging to the same gender but a different sex are socialised differently, underlines this. However, I like it as a thought experiment, not as a realistic political ideal. Gender categories are such an ingrained part of society that the idea that it does not exist at all is too theoretical and too idealistic. We may have constructed these categories ourselves, but before we can get rid of them (if we can, at all, which I don't believe is realistic) we need to use them to destroy the power structures that came with them, first.

I always have a bit of a knee jerk response to radical feminism, because most of my conversations have been with TERFs, who not only do not include trans individuals in their idea of feminism (which is a problem, because, and I realise this is a gross generalisation, transwomen generally suffer more ridicule and discrimination than transmen, because of misogyny) but also tend to be deeply transphobic. One TERF I used to speak too basically could have proposed the North Carolina bathroom bill herself, as people with penises (aka transwomen) should not be in their bathrooms, but transmen are also traitors to the sisterhood, etc. But I have no idea what percentage of radical feminists are TERFs, and (intersectional) radical feminism in itself is a good political philosophy.

You're right, radical feminism definitely gets a bad rep, and for a good reason most of the time. I think the term "intersectional" is probably better, in terms of societal view, because radical feminism is associated with terfs. Now that I think about it, I should probably just identify as an intersectional feminist, because it defines my goals better. I mostly used radical to differentiate from choice feminism, but, intersectional does that well enough on it's own.

Queer theory as a thought experiment does sound good to me, too. But, it just seems to have no practical real world application right now, and idk, I prefer not to treat it as gospel truth, as a few people do. As far as people identifying with it, I will respect their identity, ofc, but I don't want to be involved with it myself, until we can, as you said, break down the power structures that come along with gender and sexuality.

[karma_yeah]

I posted in the main thread, but it probably really belonged here.

I heard Prince died today, and that's really sad. He was enormously talented. But then I heard on the news that the UK has issued a travel advisory about the anti-LGBTQ laws that have been passed in several US states (they mentioned North Carolina where will have a show, and Mississippi).

And who can blame them. It's embarrassing to live in a country where a minority of conservatives with power can't find anything productive to do, but instead find ways to make life difficult for people they have no contact with and know nothing about. I live in a state who's previous governor (and former presidential candidate) didn't believe in evolution! Ugg.

As I said in the main thread, I'm hoping it gets a lot of press and that people will pay more attention to the way the "system" is set up in America right now. I think these are dangerous people set on restricting rights for women and minorities. Aren't we supposed to be a beacon of democracy?

Because of the drama around the Republican candidates for president this year, people here are finally being educated about the fact that in some states people's "votes" don't count at all. Candidates can actually be selected by a small group of party-selected "delegates". I don't agree with Donald Trump on most things, but he is right about the fact that the election system is rigged. (maybe not "rigged" but definitely not what most people think of)

[daphenaxa]

I posted in the main thread, but it probably really belonged here.

I heard Prince died today, and that's really sad. He was enormously talented. But then I heard on the news that the UK has issued a travel advisory about the anti-LGBTQ laws that have been passed in several US states (they mentioned North Carolina where will have a show, and Mississippi).

And who can blame them. It's embarrassing to live in a country where a minority of conservatives with power can't find anything productive to do, but instead find ways to make life difficult for people they have no contact with and know nothing about. I live in a state who's previous governor (and former presidential candidate) didn't believe in evolution! Ugg.

As I said in the main thread, I'm hoping it gets a lot of press and that people will pay more attention to the way the "system" is set up in America right now. I think these are dangerous people set on restricting rights for women and minorities. Aren't we supposed to be a beacon of democracy?

Because of the drama around the Republican candidates for president this year, people here are finally being educated about the fact that in some states people's "votes" don't count at all. Candidates can actually be selected by a small group of party-selected "delegates". I don't agree with Donald Trump on most things, but he is right about the fact that the election system is rigged. (maybe not "rigged" but definitely not what most people think of)

could you explain the process and how it is possible that this is legal?? (if you know)
because it looks like blatant discrimination and segregation. I don't understand how it's legal. If you replace gay with Black or any other race, it makes it very clear it is exactly what segregation was. I am surprised the US that had such an history with that issue would go back.

[teamug]

Conservatives preserving religious freedoms.
Discrimination remains illegal on a federal level, but individual states can make laws that null federal laws. In this case, a business/person can now legally refuse service to a customer on the basis of fundamentally held religious beliefs of that business/person. Basically, being unable to discriminate was seen as discriminatory, apparently it's a dilemma for some very vocal white middle-class southerners.
As for how this is possible? People are ignorant, and some possibly stupid.

On the topic of super-delegates, I personally think the two-party system is at greater fault for hindering a better electoral process.