Re: medication, as a part of my job, I've been following debates and have been involved with some mental health services users' organisations in France, UK, Europe in general, as well as US, and there are a lot of people who think that the use of medication should be seriously limited, if not abandoned, in the treatment of all mental illnesses, not just depression, and community-based therapy, such as open dialogue, should be preferred. The big pharma's lobby, and all that is related, is definitely one of the most important concerns. When it comes to prescriptions, I guess it all depends on the position of a particular psychiatrist and what kinds of resources you have access to when you first get diagnosed and are looking for information.
I think that Dan, especially when he became involved with Young Minds, was exposed to a variety of views on the subject, so he was quite comfortable voicing that opinion. Not that there's anything wrong with continuing to take medication if that's something that the person has made an informed decision on.
Edit: sorry for this boring post on top of the page
Dan & Phil Part 82: now onto the future
- coffeepenguin
- rainbow nerd
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 5:27 pm
- Pronouns: she/her
- Location: France
Dan wants to be understood. Phil just wants to make the viewer smile and sell some backpacks (c) fancybum
Catallena wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:32 pm Yeah when I was put on anti depressants, it was definitely not supposed to be a permanent thing. They were supposed to make my life easier for 2 years at most while I underwent therapy for dysthymia, but also for a crippling anxiety disorder which got re-diagnosed into PTSD at the time (I got two more diagnoses years after that). The goal was to have therapy replace the effect of the prozac, and then to have me go on without either. And I think that's a pretty common way of dealing with it here?
Personally I was more surprised that he mentioned stopping therapy during tour, that I can't even imagine. I've been going without for barely two months and I have no idea how to cope after that.
I couldn't bring myself to watch all of Adrians video but the difference in approach is quite drastic. Not a fan tbh.
Will probably never be over the BONCAS and the beauty of Phil Lester.
Official Moving Hill Mayor
- obsessivelymoody
- emo goose
- Posts: 1134
- Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:56 am
- Pronouns: she/her
- Location: canada
Just chiming in on the topic that I visited my doctor for mental health purposes about a month ago and me being me, I was quite shocked when he almost word for word said Dan's opinion on medication. My doctor has a UK background but practices in Canada so maybe it's a mix of those influences, not sure I don't know anything about the medical industry besides basics, but he said therapy in combination with medication is what he typically recommends.
And while we don't know if maybe Dan decided to go back on the medication before or during the tour, since he did have that breakdown, but I also can't imagine how difficult that would have been. I guess that's why part of me wants him to make a video in his anecdotal Dan way about therapy (since he did briefly hint to it in d&d) because I'd be interested to hear about his experiences, even from a quite tailored lens.
And while we don't know if maybe Dan decided to go back on the medication before or during the tour, since he did have that breakdown, but I also can't imagine how difficult that would have been. I guess that's why part of me wants him to make a video in his anecdotal Dan way about therapy (since he did briefly hint to it in d&d) because I'd be interested to hear about his experiences, even from a quite tailored lens.
Oh cool I just finished listening to an hour and a half audiotape that Adrian made with a host he stayed with on the Canary Islands and there's a video too. The content is realy
@knq I can only speak of the views of therapists I've gone to (in Belgium), and their answer was nuanced. It depends on the person and the situation. If you're (clinically) depressed, have relapsed when going off medication or if medication seems to be effective and the side effects aren't to bad, they took a pragmatic view on the matter and argued that maybe it's better to keep taking medication. As @BuffyFiona says, there probably is no answer that suits all situations and people.
It would be strange to me if a psychiatrist, doctor or psychologist would suggest to keep taking medication for no apparent good medical reason? But then again some medication does often get prescribed to much (antibiotics is a known issue), and in the worst case I could see other non-medical reasons influencing the prescription of (US) mental health professionals, like the fear to get sued for misjudging risks or making mistakes. I have read a lot about how this is a crippling issue in the US and drives the overconsumption of scans and some other treatments.
Dan's take on antidepressant meds I have always understood to be more of his own view than a factual claim. It was his goal, and it was right for him. His general take imo was very much: do what works for you but why not give treatment a chance. I just had this discussion with my therapist earlier this week, and he said it's a goal of a lot of patients to try 'get rid' of the medication asap. If the bad experience came with the withdrawal, that suggests he had made a decision about it before he actually started withdrawing. We can't look into his mind, but with me my motivation to go of meds is mostly about the idea that I very much prefer not to be dependent on them, and would rather solve the root causes, and feel I should be able to do it 'on my own strength'. Another common point of view my therapist had have a lot of patients bring up Maybe that could have been Dan's reasoning too. It would be very interesting if he would talk a bit more about his whole experience (at times i would swear half of this fandom is in therapy), but I understand why it might be to personal to share.
Phil's hospital video was barely a day old and people already started making their own medical conclusions and speculating from that (a bit like we're doing right now when speculating about Daniel and his depression).
@knq I can only speak of the views of therapists I've gone to (in Belgium), and their answer was nuanced. It depends on the person and the situation. If you're (clinically) depressed, have relapsed when going off medication or if medication seems to be effective and the side effects aren't to bad, they took a pragmatic view on the matter and argued that maybe it's better to keep taking medication. As @BuffyFiona says, there probably is no answer that suits all situations and people.
It would be strange to me if a psychiatrist, doctor or psychologist would suggest to keep taking medication for no apparent good medical reason? But then again some medication does often get prescribed to much (antibiotics is a known issue), and in the worst case I could see other non-medical reasons influencing the prescription of (US) mental health professionals, like the fear to get sued for misjudging risks or making mistakes. I have read a lot about how this is a crippling issue in the US and drives the overconsumption of scans and some other treatments.
Dan's take on antidepressant meds I have always understood to be more of his own view than a factual claim. It was his goal, and it was right for him. His general take imo was very much: do what works for you but why not give treatment a chance. I just had this discussion with my therapist earlier this week, and he said it's a goal of a lot of patients to try 'get rid' of the medication asap. If the bad experience came with the withdrawal, that suggests he had made a decision about it before he actually started withdrawing. We can't look into his mind, but with me my motivation to go of meds is mostly about the idea that I very much prefer not to be dependent on them, and would rather solve the root causes, and feel I should be able to do it 'on my own strength'. Another common point of view my therapist had have a lot of patients bring up Maybe that could have been Dan's reasoning too. It would be very interesting if he would talk a bit more about his whole experience (at times i would swear half of this fandom is in therapy), but I understand why it might be to personal to share.
Phil's hospital video was barely a day old and people already started making their own medical conclusions and speculating from that (a bit like we're doing right now when speculating about Daniel and his depression).
Finding my own inarticulate prose
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
- alittledizzy
- actual demon phannie
- Posts: 7101
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
- Pronouns: she/her
I didn't do this earlier so I just want to take a moment to express my appreciation for Phil acknowledging the best reaction picture to exist, the emotionanal one.
- lesterchuu
- philussy
- Posts: 486
- Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2018 5:42 pm
- Pronouns: he/she/they
- Location: canada
wait wtf i never noticed it was spelled that way and im pretty sure ive religiously watched every damn radio show live back then and still didnt notice..... @knq me and you samealittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:10 amI didn't do this earlier so I just want to take a moment to express my appreciation for Phil acknowledging the best reaction picture to exist, the emotionanal one.
"you are next to me in my life"
- Afunnyworld
- sofa crease
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 5:31 am
- Pronouns: she/her
- Location: USA
- obsessivelymoody
- emo goose
- Posts: 1134
- Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:56 am
- Pronouns: she/her
- Location: canada
While I would die if that were real, and would kind of expect it from 2019 Phil, it was just a meme someone made (though it is my fave reaction pic to use lol). This is the original:lesterchuu wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:17 amwait wtf i never noticed it was spelled that way and im pretty sure ive religiously watched every damn radio show live back then and still didnt notice..... @knq me and you samealittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:10 amI didn't do this earlier so I just want to take a moment to express my appreciation for Phil acknowledging the best reaction picture to exist, the emotionanal one.
- lesterchuu
- philussy
- Posts: 486
- Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2018 5:42 pm
- Pronouns: he/she/they
- Location: canada
moody coming thru with the cold hard facts, good to know my memory wasnt wrongobsessivelymoody wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:46 am While I would die if that were real, and would kind of expect it from 2019 Phil, it was just a meme someone made (though it is my fave reaction pic to use lol). This is the original:
The moment starts at about 10:14 of this radio show on December 15, 2013
still, phil liking that meme was pretty funny tho
"you are next to me in my life"
i was verrrry resistant to taking medication for depression/anxiety, told my therapist that in our first session and she didn't bring it up again (until i did, about a year later). she also said it could be something temporary but that it could also be something i took longer or forever -- that everyone's responses were different, that we might have to try different types, etc. eventually as i was on it for longer (and having gone a week or so off of it and realising it was NOT a good thing) i knew the temporary route was no longer an option and this was a much more long term thing.
so, tldr, maybe at that point when dan made the video that's where his mind was at, that this would be temporary or that this would be a goal he would work towards. maybe it's the same now, maybe it's not. i do hope we get another/more danecdotes on his mental health journey, ttlmt was just... refreshing? not even that it was HIM talking about it although of course that was nice, but moreso that a young adult's experience having a mental illness and with treatment was being talked about at all in such a well organized but honest and articulate way.
also in all the talk about 2012 dan and the blog that shall not be named, i'm reminded of
ps i'm so excited to try tuna and corn pizza yall don't even KNOW
so, tldr, maybe at that point when dan made the video that's where his mind was at, that this would be temporary or that this would be a goal he would work towards. maybe it's the same now, maybe it's not. i do hope we get another/more danecdotes on his mental health journey, ttlmt was just... refreshing? not even that it was HIM talking about it although of course that was nice, but moreso that a young adult's experience having a mental illness and with treatment was being talked about at all in such a well organized but honest and articulate way.
also in all the talk about 2012 dan and the blog that shall not be named, i'm reminded of
ps i'm so excited to try tuna and corn pizza yall don't even KNOW
- coconut
- tol bean
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 4:25 am
- Pronouns: she/her
- Location: West Coast, USA
I’ve seen the conditions of people in my life vastly improve taking medication for their mental illnesses, but I’ve also seen the same people suffering when given an incorrect dosage/prescription, and they’ve in turn mentioned that they would like to stop taking so many meds based on their withdrawal/negative experience. If this is where Dan’s coming from I see that.
In regard to Dan being very stable on tour despite not going to therapy— in his and Phil’s own words, because he “had a purpose”— of course, depression does not look or behave the same way in everyone. From a similar personal experience I feel maybe tour addressed the underlying need, but the feeling of it ending and being “back at square one” is very jarring and imo disheartening, which then leads to a low point. (Not intending to project in order to “prove” anything, just my two cents!)
- Ataraxia25
- flower crown
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:31 pm
- Pronouns: they/them
- Location: france
Yes, I don't know if it's everywhere in France but when i went on medication a few years ago it was supposed to be temporary, but it's because we were just getting to see the tip of my mental heath iceberg and in the end i had them for two years. Same a year later, had a relapse, was supposed to take medication for three months and ended taking them for a long time, i'm actually still taking them now but at the smallest dose.coffeepenguin wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:58 pm Re: medication, as a part of my job, I've been following debates and have been involved with some mental health services users' organisations in France, UK, Europe in general, as well as US, and there are a lot of people who think that the use of medication should be seriously limited, if not abandoned, in the treatment of all mental illnesses, not just depression, and community-based therapy, such as open dialogue, should be preferred.
And i feel like everyone is a bit wary towards medication, even psychiatrists. I was always told to go to a therapist (who cannot prescribe medication) rather than a psychiatrist because psychiatrists have this reputation of just giving you some medication and that's all, without going in depth about the real underlying issue.
- Ataraxia25
- flower crown
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:31 pm
- Pronouns: they/them
- Location: france
I double post because i've been thinking about this for the past few minutes:
I havent re-read Dan's replies so what i'm gonna say is gonna be a general answer.
It's not because there are really bad full on homophobes out there that a "joke" like you think Dan made doesn't hurt. So what you think is not offensive or homophobic may be hurtful for someone else who may think it is in fact homophobic.
And I think the little jokes like that are the hardest to fight and i think it's exactly for that reason that they need to be called out.
Also you made the distinction between Dan and the actual homophobes out there and you put in your post his reply saying he is of course a LGBT supporter. But to me, it's not because you are a supporter or even a member of the community that you're immune to doing something homophobic sometimes.
Stakhanov wrote: ↑Wed Feb 13, 2019 11:10 pm (wow I thought i posted this 2 hours ago but it somehow didn't luckily I copied the text and it was still stored on the clipboard)
@waveydnp What about Dan's replies is homophobic specifically? I've just reread them, and at worst I can see one joke where he parodies a gay accent? Which I don't find offensive at all. There is a difference to Dan making a joke (even if it the humor is stereotypical) and being homophobic. If you think those are equal, I think you trivialize the term to the point it means nothing. I would find that pretty disheartening as a bi person, as there are plenty of actual homophobes I would like to use the word for. So I do put the term in quotation marks.
Funnily enough, one of his replies on the blog makes clear to me he's an ally (as he has been since the very beginning I've known him):
I havent re-read Dan's replies so what i'm gonna say is gonna be a general answer.
It's not because there are really bad full on homophobes out there that a "joke" like you think Dan made doesn't hurt. So what you think is not offensive or homophobic may be hurtful for someone else who may think it is in fact homophobic.
And I think the little jokes like that are the hardest to fight and i think it's exactly for that reason that they need to be called out.
Also you made the distinction between Dan and the actual homophobes out there and you put in your post his reply saying he is of course a LGBT supporter. But to me, it's not because you are a supporter or even a member of the community that you're immune to doing something homophobic sometimes.
I never really understood why so many people in the Phandom say that 2012 Dan was so horrible and homophobic. I mean, I'll admit that he didn't really handle his Blog very well back then. He didn't really know what he was doing, he didn't have the experience on how to approach certain topics yet. But homophobic? Where?
Most of his blog was just him defending himself. Saying that he isn't gay is not homophobic, saying that he doesn't want to date/kiss his best friend is not homophobic, saying that he doesn't want to wear nail polish is not homophobic. His "famous" fyi: I like vagina quote is also not homophobic. It's definitely a kinda weird statement if it comes out of nowhere, but nothing homophobic about it.
Back then he didn't know how to handle his internet fame properly, 2012 was when they kinda blew up on Youtube and I guess it just hit him hard and he thought that the best way to handle stuff that he didn't like was by being defensive, sometimes rude and angry. I feel a lot of people in the Phandom don't like 2012 Dan because he was actively denying Phan back then, which still is nothing homophobic.
I don't ship Phan and I don't think that they are dating, so maybe that's why I see things different when I look back to those "bad 2012 times"?
Most of his blog was just him defending himself. Saying that he isn't gay is not homophobic, saying that he doesn't want to date/kiss his best friend is not homophobic, saying that he doesn't want to wear nail polish is not homophobic. His "famous" fyi: I like vagina quote is also not homophobic. It's definitely a kinda weird statement if it comes out of nowhere, but nothing homophobic about it.
Back then he didn't know how to handle his internet fame properly, 2012 was when they kinda blew up on Youtube and I guess it just hit him hard and he thought that the best way to handle stuff that he didn't like was by being defensive, sometimes rude and angry. I feel a lot of people in the Phandom don't like 2012 Dan because he was actively denying Phan back then, which still is nothing homophobic.
I don't ship Phan and I don't think that they are dating, so maybe that's why I see things different when I look back to those "bad 2012 times"?
Good point. I do think we tend to overlook how people can hide their depressions and appear to be doing fine and functioning to expectations while they might be slipping into a deeper repression. Dan draws attention to this too in the video. It can very well be that while we see him with friend, laughing, he's really not doing well. That could have been the case even during the tour, though like you say he has explicitly talked about how the tour gave hims something to do every day, gave him some purpose. But he also said that the touring period could be a highly productive time for content, and that they had planned ahead so that we wouldn't notice much of a changecoconut wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:33 am
In regard to Dan being very stable on tour despite not going to therapy— in his and Phil’s own words, because he “had a purpose”— of course, depression does not look or behave the same way in everyone. From a similar personal experience I feel maybe tour addressed the underlying need, but the feeling of it ending and being “back at square one” is very jarring and imo disheartening, which then leads to a low point. (Not intending to project in order to “prove” anything, just my two cents!)
It's just complex i guess, like depressions usually are. I hope he's not experiencing to much of a low point because when he talks about this void, and how he can't do anything except stay in bed, it send shivers to my spine. We mostly know him as he likes to portray himself, as a youtube entertainer, in short bursts, through edited and loosely scritped vids. How he feels all that time he's not recording (or even when he's recording with a smile) we really don't know. We often don't even recognize when our own friends and family are going through mental health problems.
@Ataraxia25
I can understand that any joke or word can be hurtful or offensive to others. I wouldn't ever deny an individual can be impacted. Everyone has their own past and lives through their own experiences which can make even the most well intended little joke extremely hurtful. That's one reason that in interpersonal relationships I always try to be kind and polite to people. As I get to know a person better, you get better at navigating what things you can talk about and then funnily enough it is among friends where you often can get refreshingly blunt or sufficiently tactful to bring up issues you wouldn't even talk about with others. But in a public space (such as that blog) you're talking to an abstract audience and you have a right to express yourself as you are, even if that will clash with the sensibilities and sensitivities of others. I Dan's case, he states in the blog himself that he is a "sarcastic, alternative guys that is sometimes inappropriate". So yes, no doubt his replies are hurtful to some but that's fine. Nobody is forced to read his writings and everybody can cause offense (most of the times unwittingly).I havent re-read Dan's replies so what i'm gonna say is gonna be a general answer.
It's not because there are really bad full on homophobes out there that a "joke" like you think Dan made doesn't hurt. So what you think is not offensive or homophobic may be hurtful for someone else who may think it is in fact homophobic.
And I think the little jokes like that are the hardest to fight and i think it's exactly for that reason that they need to be called out.
Also you made the distinction between Dan and the actual homophobes out there and you put in your post his reply saying he is of course a LGBT supporter. But to me, it's not because you are a supporter or even a member of the community that you're immune to doing something homophobic sometimes.
Where we fundamentally disagree is in calling a subjectively hurtful or offensive joke homophobic. These are two different matters. Homophobic does mean something, and it's not equal to having caused hurt. it's defined as "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" (I looked up some definitions, took the Merriam-Webster one here, but they are all fairly similar). Now my question to @waveydnp and you is: what specifically in his replies is homophobic? Are you calling him out because he is homophobic or are you calling him out because he has made a comment or joke you found hurtful? Again I would like to use the terms when applicable to actual homophobes who have this irrational fear, aversion and discriminate on the basis of it. If you label a little joke as homophobic because it's hurtful to you, you are redefining the concept to something it isn't. I started by saying I would never deny your right to feel hurt of offended by a joke or comment, and I would hope you wouldn't try to deny my experience. I personally found some of Dan's jokes entertaining and refreshing. I'm not the only one. To make a comparison with mental health jokes: some people find them 'problematic' and harmful while others see in them a way to cope and help them with life and their mental health. You just can't say that a comment or joke is uniformly impacting everyone the same way. By consequence, you can't even claim a joke is objectively hurtful, let alone homophobic. At best you can argue that most or many people find something hurtful, and bring up context and history to explain why.
I feel this point is badly understood by people who feel hurt or offended by something and then claim the person causing it must be a (vile) aggressor who is homophobic, insensitive to others mental health, ableist, racist or pick your moral evil. These are real problems in our societies, and I would hope when we accuse someone of fitting that label, we draw the line in accordance with what these terms mean, taking into account context and intent, instead of cheapening it to the point where it's original weight and meaning is lost and many can't support what you put under it's umbrella.
Finding my own inarticulate prose
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
Welcome +1 to this and it's nice to hear from someone in this fandom for once that 2012 wasn't some annus horribilis (yes I did just make a lame joke about the Queens speech).Nevermind wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:09 am I never really understood why so many people in the Phandom say that 2012 Dan was so horrible and homophobic. I mean, I'll admit that he didn't really handle his Blog very well back then. He didn't really know what he was doing, he didn't have the experience on how to approach certain topics yet. But homophobic? Where?
Most of his blog was just him defending himself. Saying that he isn't gay is not homophobic, saying that he doesn't want to date/kiss his best friend is not homophobic, saying that he doesn't want to wear nail polish is not homophobic. His "famous" fyi: I like vagina quote is also not homophobic. It's definitely a kinda weird statement if it comes out of nowhere, but nothing homophobic about it.
Back then he didn't know how to handle his internet fame properly, 2012 was when they kinda blew up on Youtube and I guess it just hit him hard and he thought that the best way to handle stuff that he didn't like was by being defensive, sometimes rude and angry. I feel a lot of people in the Phandom don't like 2012 Dan because he was actively denying Phan back then, which still is nothing homophobic.
I don't ship Phan and I don't think that they are dating, so maybe that's why I see things different when I look back to those "bad 2012 times"?
Finding my own inarticulate prose
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
- autumnhearth
- senpai
- Posts: 1726
- Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:44 am
- Pronouns: she/her
- Location: OH, USA
@Stakhanov fine I’ll bite. These are things that stand out to me, that while not strongly or objectively homophobic, could be subjectively so and “if” they are together many do qualify as gaslighting. At the very least they feel like a slap to the face to me and I’m others (I’m sure they don’t to you). Under the cut so as not to taint this day of love (if anyone celebrates it as such, I don’t really, but this is also not what I hoped to be doing with my morning).
- alittledizzy
- actual demon phannie
- Posts: 7101
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
- Pronouns: she/her
It's been a while since I've read some of those. Yikes. I understand the context of the situation for Dan, I understand the place he was coming from while I still don't condone his microaggressions. But his lashed out intent was to make people feel ridiculous for thinking two men could be in a relationship, and that's damaging and homophobic. It's extremely difficult for me to even comprehend any other interpretation besides him wanting people to feel shame for thinking two men in their situation might be a couple and he went about it in the most negative, demeaning way possible.
I'm proud he rethought that blog so quickly and deleted it, just like I'm proud he eventually rethought some of his past videos and deleted them. I don't want to ignore his past but the Dan I like best is the Dan that I see grew from that. I still can't understand the appeal anyone sees in Dan if they think he is still the exact same person on the inside, who would say those exact same things today ~if only fans didn't oppress him so. But to each their own, I guess. I'll stay in my corner just appreciating the idea that Dan is self aware and has matured as a person to understand the meaning that words and implications like that have.
I'm proud he rethought that blog so quickly and deleted it, just like I'm proud he eventually rethought some of his past videos and deleted them. I don't want to ignore his past but the Dan I like best is the Dan that I see grew from that. I still can't understand the appeal anyone sees in Dan if they think he is still the exact same person on the inside, who would say those exact same things today ~if only fans didn't oppress him so. But to each their own, I guess. I'll stay in my corner just appreciating the idea that Dan is self aware and has matured as a person to understand the meaning that words and implications like that have.
And that's exactly what I meant in my earlier post. People who strongly believe/want to believe that they are dating seem to read those old quotes in a totally different way than I do for example. None of the quotes posted above contain homophobia. He's not mocking the idea of just 2 random men being together. He just doesn't like the idea of him and Phil being together, which is personal preference and not homophobia.alittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:05 pm It's been a while since I've read some of those, but yeah. I understand the context of the situation for Dan, I understand the place he was coming from while I still don't condone his microaggressions. But his lashed out intent was to make people feel ridiculous for thinking two men could be in a relationship, and that's damaging and homophobic.
Let me maybe surprise on this day of love but I agree with everything you say above the tag. Reading his posts I see someone who is clearly angry, frustrated about all the growing cohort of fans that believe they are in a romantic relationship, sometimes with a lot of passion and plenty of fanfiction and graphical fanart. You speak about the effect his crude wording and denial has on you as a viewer. That's one perspective, which I don't mean to diminish, but it is true that there are other perspectives too. That of the fan who does not believe they are together but who sees the effect the ship has on the content that's made, on what becomes popular and expected of them, on how it influences and limits what they do. More relevant perhaps is the perspective of Dan and Phil themselves. I feel that's getting overlooked here. Imagine for a moment they aren't together. (I guess this is a less romantic version of typical Phan imagine ). You see how part of your rapidly growing audience rejects your own truth. Some people don't believe you when you say the v-day video as a prank and think they've gotten intimate glance into your love life. You have since 2009 said you are not in a relationship and not gay (you are bisexual) and your genuine friendship gets misinterpreted and sexualized. I can't speak for you, but I would try to correct that perception. I would feel like people act like I'm a liar, don't care about what I think or feel and come to a bunch of wrong conclusions while they can't know the truth of it. Maybe I realize that I shouldn't have shipbaited and flirted on social media in 2009, and don't want my audience to focus on that part of my life in which i was 'prone to lying and attention seeking". Maybe reality was complicated and some interest was real at the time, was about my ex which I was breaking up with or barely had broken up with, or was a way to gather attention and an inside joke.autumnhearth wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:15 pm @Stakhanov fine I’ll bite. These are things that stand out to me, that while not strongly or objectively homophobic, could be subjectively so and “if” they are together many do qualify as gaslighting. At the very least they feel like a slap to the face to me and I’m others (I’m sure they don’t to you). Under the cut so as not to taint this day of love (if anyone celebrates it as such, I don’t really, but this is also not what I hoped to be doing with my morning).
Anyway you get the point if Dan was sincere and wasn't in a relationship I think their are many good subjective reasons that he wanted to make his position crystal clear. I doubt he would phrase it the same way now as he did in 2012, I agree that in his replies you see a lot of anger and he could have stayed more polite. But I think he's just human like everyone is. I see people butchering each other within the fandom in far crueler ways. Yes, that doesn't mean that his wording couldn't be better but I understand that he was pretty young and felt genuinely slapped in the face too.
Finding my own inarticulate prose
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
Weirding out strangers and laughing at those
Jaundiced and jaded, postured and posed
Not that we’re special it’s just that we’re
Closing in on a place where we might get to be
Living real people regularly
- alittledizzy
- actual demon phannie
- Posts: 7101
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
- Pronouns: she/her
I prefaced with understanding the context as a means of saying this is why I am not holding 2012 Dan against 2019 Dan, but my belief that they're dating does not change the fact that implying that thinking two men are together is wrong/relating that to creepy/weird/insane is the issue.Nevermind wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:08 pmAnd that's exactly what I meant in my earlier post. People who strongly believe/want to believe that they are dating seem to read those old quotes in a totally different way than I do for example. None of the quotes posted above contain homophobia. He's not mocking the idea of just 2 random men being together. He just doesn't like the idea of him and Phil being together, which is personal preference and not homophobia.alittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:05 pm It's been a while since I've read some of those, but yeah. I understand the context of the situation for Dan, I understand the place he was coming from while I still don't condone his microaggressions. But his lashed out intent was to make people feel ridiculous for thinking two men could be in a relationship, and that's damaging and homophobic.
Yes, I agree, that would be an issue, if he actually had said that. But he didn't. He found it creepy that people kept on shipping him and Phil, trying to prove that they are in a relationship, even though he said many times that they were just platonic friends. This isn't about homosexuality at all. It's about the fact that random people on the internet wanted to believe that he is dating someone he wasn't. It would have been the same if one of them was a girl, except no one would have seen any moral issues with them denying phan then.alittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:20 pmI prefaced with understanding the context as a means of saying this is why I am not holding 2012 Dan against 2019 Dan, but my belief that they're dating does not change the fact that implying that thinking two men are together is wrong/relating that to creepy/weird/insane is the issue.Nevermind wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:08 pmAnd that's exactly what I meant in my earlier post. People who strongly believe/want to believe that they are dating seem to read those old quotes in a totally different way than I do for example. None of the quotes posted above contain homophobia. He's not mocking the idea of just 2 random men being together. He just doesn't like the idea of him and Phil being together, which is personal preference and not homophobia.alittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:05 pm It's been a while since I've read some of those, but yeah. I understand the context of the situation for Dan, I understand the place he was coming from while I still don't condone his microaggressions. But his lashed out intent was to make people feel ridiculous for thinking two men could be in a relationship, and that's damaging and homophobic.
- alittledizzy
- actual demon phannie
- Posts: 7101
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
- Pronouns: she/her
Things like "secretly gay" "bumming my friend" "wrong and creepy" "'gays' lol." and adding "haha" to the end of the question that just directly asked if he was gay - all phrases that specifically mention queerness or queer acts in the context of demeaning the relationship that people were asking him about. If he really wanted to make it just about saying he and Phil weren't together he could have very, very, very easily responded to the same question using respectful phrasing or keeping his disrespect limited to saying they weren't together and not linking the animosity toward sexuality as well.Nevermind wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:27 pmYes, I agree, that would be an issue, if he actually had said that. But he didn't. He found it creepy that people kept on shipping him and Phil, trying to prove that they are in a relationship, even though he said many times that they were just platonic friends. This isn't about homosexuality at all. It's about the fact that random people on the internet wanted to believe that he is dating someone he wasn't. It would have been the same if one of them was a girl, except no one would have seen any moral issues with them denying phan then.alittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:20 pmI prefaced with understanding the context as a means of saying this is why I am not holding 2012 Dan against 2019 Dan, but my belief that they're dating does not change the fact that implying that thinking two men are together is wrong/relating that to creepy/weird/insane is the issue.Nevermind wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:08 pmAnd that's exactly what I meant in my earlier post. People who strongly believe/want to believe that they are dating seem to read those old quotes in a totally different way than I do for example. None of the quotes posted above contain homophobia. He's not mocking the idea of just 2 random men being together. He just doesn't like the idea of him and Phil being together, which is personal preference and not homophobia.alittledizzy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:05 pm It's been a while since I've read some of those, but yeah. I understand the context of the situation for Dan, I understand the place he was coming from while I still don't condone his microaggressions. But his lashed out intent was to make people feel ridiculous for thinking two men could be in a relationship, and that's damaging and homophobic.