Ticia wrote:In this regard, Phil doesn't flirt with boys like he does with girls (like bedhead91 notes, even though I personally wouldn't qualify those comments as flirting on my standards) BUT at the same time he stated he's bisexual. Dan may consider his own past bisexuality claims as "attention seeking" and "being young", but when Phil said it, he was 24ish years old, so..yeah.
Moreover, we know of past crushes/close friends of Phil's -the underwear model and Charlie-, which confirms his bisexuality, but we shamelessly focus so so so much on Dan Phil is not even a topic
I see what you're saying, but possible (unconfirmed, we can only speculate) crushes/dalliances can't really be used to confirm anything. Phil is an impressively closed book. Does flirting with Dan count for flirting with boys? Because I mean... I still haven't seen the dinof video, save me from real life I want to watch the internet
daphenaxa wrote:on the topic of Dan flirting with men more in his videos, I don't think it is because he flirts with males more. I think it has to do with the personality of the people he collabed with. He did flirt with Tyler Oakley and the Harries twins but because they are massive flirts. Like it is their modus operandi, that's how they interact with people, they flirt with everyone and since it's with everyone it is not threatening because it's not a real "I am interested in you" flirt. I just think Dan is not a flirty person at all (on the contrary Phil is a lot). Look how he didn't respond AT ALL at Jennifer Lawrence or Sam Smith flirting with him. But he reacts positively to one kind of over the top flirty personality that makes him comfortable to flirt back for joke just like with Tyler and Jack Harries. (don't get me wrong, I do think he was attracted to Jack. But I don't think that's why he flirted)
I don't think he flirted with Connor. He was a bit intimidated (maybe has a slight crush on him) and just came off as awks. And in his other collabs he didn't flirt with the guys at all, even with Caspar and we know that he finds him attractive.
One other thing is that Dan hasn't collabed with any woman apart from Louise, Carrie and Cat (i think) and they don't flirt with him at all, so we don't know how he would respond.
Honestly I didn't get any gay vibes from those videos. Campy Dan was here strong on his channel but that's not really news and him saying he is not an alpha male is not really news either. He has acknowledged it several times. I don't even think there were male mentions that much?
I agree with this whole post.
And regarding the subject of Dan flirting: I'm of the same opinion as you, daphenaxa; Dan doesn't strike me as a very "flirty" person. I do think he does it sometimes, but I can't think of like specific instances. So to anyone who sees Dan as a flirt (if anyone even does? I'm not sure): I'd love to see examples!
daphenaxa wrote:on the topic of Dan flirting with men more in his videos, I don't think it is because he flirts with males more. I think it has to do with the personality of the people he collabed with. He did flirt with Tyler Oakley and the Harries twins but because they are massive flirts. Like it is their modus operandi, that's how they interact with people, they flirt with everyone and since it's with everyone it is not threatening because it's not a real "I am interested in you" flirt. I just think Dan is not a flirty person at all (on the contrary Phil is a lot). Look how he didn't respond AT ALL at Jennifer Lawrence or Sam Smith flirting with him. But he reacts positively to one kind of over the top flirty personality that makes him comfortable to flirt back for joke just like with Tyler and Jack Harries. (don't get me wrong, I do think he was attracted to Jack. But I don't think that's why he flirted)
I don't think he flirted with Connor. He was a bit intimidated (maybe has a slight crush on him) and just came off as awks. And in his other collabs he didn't flirt with the guys at all, even with Caspar and we know that he finds him attractive.
One other thing is that Dan hasn't collabed with any woman apart from Louise, Carrie and Cat (i think) and they don't flirt with him at all, so we don't know how he would respond.
Honestly I didn't get any gay vibes from those videos. Campy Dan was here strong on his channel but that's not really news and him saying he is not an alpha male is not really news either. He has acknowledged it several times. I don't even think there were male mentions that much?
I agree with this whole post.
And regarding the subject of Dan flirting: I'm of the same opinion as you, daphenaxa; Dan doesn't strike me as a very "flirty" person. I do think he does it sometimes, but I can't think of like specific instances. So to anyone who sees Dan as a flirt (if anyone even does? I'm not sure): I'd love to see examples!
I agree Dan is not a flirty person, he doesn't flirt with anyone except Phil, I didn't get a flirty vibe from him in his collab with the harries or tyler tbh. With Tyler he was just mirroring Tyler's sense of humor (and maybe bring out his own sassy side), with the harries was just pure pathetic, he was out of the focus most of time in jack's video, and basically an awkward their wheel between the twins, and the video on Dan's channel was even more disastrous with Dan had absolutely no control over the twins (and problematic comments by the twins).
IckleMissMayhem wrote:
starlight-still "nosh" to me is a BJ. As in: "nosh [s.o.] off" Welks.
You know, this is what we're all about here on idb: bantz, of course, but also a bit of cultural exchange, a bit of education thrown in the mix... omg it really only means 'eating' or 'snacking' how i've used it now i realize the other day when i was like 'popcorn noshin' dan' and phil...really?
I have a confession to make: I still don't see Phil (even AP) as this innocent/smol/precious/awkward man-child thing that everyone seems to see him as? Maybe it's because I've seen everything from 2009-10 videos to recent AP-heavy ones in the span of a couple of months, plus all of his recent tweets, plus stuff like the freaking vibrating moment from undertale
Everyone talks about him like he's Raffi (no disrespect to Raffi )...but I just don't see it? If anything, Dan's the one that comes across to me that way. as in slightly sweary "pooh bear" you know?
Re: the in the Geisha Girl drink...dan dan dan you know your fandom too well
[offtopic]In case you haven't seen/want to be hit with a wave of nostalgia from Raffi:
loved both videos as i am a sucker for anything that is slightly less scripted and controlled. Louise's affection for Dan is lovely and i do believe it to be genuine. the anecdote with Phil and his napkin had me rolling, and i do think the waiter was genuinely a bit peeved at them because i'm certain at a restaurant as fancy as that they would've replaced the napkin with a new one seeing as it had been trodden over the floor, lol.
also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
felucca, divine keeper of Deppy records & bringer of rains during this drought has uploaded all the footage of the Jamaican trip they made in 2010.
I'm 99% sure Dan is wearing one of Phil's shirts that I don't think I've seen in the in 'Dan wears Phil's clotehs' catalogue in the thumbnail of that video. Why did he even bother to deny that he wears Phil's clothes in the first place? It wouldn't have ever been weird if he had never denied it.
Haha, don't worry, that shirt is included in my compilation.
If anyone hasn't seen my post about them sharing clothes, I've included it under the spoiler. It'll eventually be included in the FAQ page once we get that up, but I figured I might as well post it here too for the time being.
Do Dan and Phil share clothes?
This post is meant to serve as an exhaustive collection of pictures of them sharing clothes, plus a compilation of all the times Dan’s denied that it happens, or at least denied that he wears Phil’s clothes for any reason other than “dressing as a character”
DISCLAIMER: I am not trying to say “omG they shur clothis!1 PHAN” (to quote Dan cough cough).
I’m just trying to make an organized masterlist of this stuff, because I ALWAYS hear people talk about the clothes-sharing, but I never saw any real sources cited for when Dan had made his infamous denials. Since people talk about it so much, I thought it would be useful to have a comprehensive post about it in the FAQ section, along with an examination what Dan’s said and why it is or is not true.
So…
Q: Do Dan and Phil share clothes, i.e. has Dan worn Phil's clothes and vice-versa?
A: Yes. See the numerous photos further down in this post!
Q: Has Dan denied that he and Phil share clothes?
A: Yes. Many times:
At least three times on vyou or in younow liveshows:
Vyou answer from July 6, 2011:
Question: I've noticed you and Phil often wear the same clothes...explain yourself!
Dan: No… pfft, “often” — what do you mean often? ...Okay, in that one video, I have the SAME pair of underwear as Phil; we both walked into Next and saw a pair of Sonic underwear and we had an argument over who should buy it, so… we both own the same pair of underwear. And for that one video, I borrowed his Babycakes t-shirt because everything I own is black and I wanted to not look boring ...“Often”? Really? [laughs] Creepers.
Liveshow from August 28, 2012:
20:05 - “I read something on, erm, Tumblr earlier… I’m thinking, uh, a segment I should start with these things is like ‘Stupid Thing Dan Saw on Tumblr of the Week.’ I’m only joking. I love everybody. […] But— I’ve had lots of people talking about, erm, me and Phil ‘sharing clothes’? Just because, you know, regardless of situation, we’ve seen — we’ve, you know, we’ve worn the same print of t-shirt on about four occasions over the last three years doesn’t mean we ~share clothes.~ You know, like, sisters do, or something like that. You know what I mean? It’s like…we own several items of the same clothing, ‘cause we’ve either been given them by somebody like Babycakes, or stuff like that. Err, me and Phil don’t like each other’s clothes. So don’t worry about that.”
28:38 - “That’s Phil’s sweater” — “No. Pretty sure it’s my sweater. I love — no I don’t love; it made me incredibly depressed — that in my last video, (laughs) all these people were like, ‘Aren’t you wearing Phil’s t-shirts?’ And I was like, ‘Erm, well, yeah, I’m playing three children playing Pokémon cards at a Pokémon party, and three Pokémon t-shirts are owned by Phil, so yeah, I— I wore Pokémon t-shirts that were owned by Phil in my video, because I was playing children at a Pokémon party! (laughs) And, like, obviously most people got that and weren’t just like ‘Ooh! Feels!’ at it, but there were a few people that genuinely didn’t— were questioning why I was wearing three of Phil’s t-shirts. So in case you were one of those people that, erm, were genuinely actually wondering why, that’s why: ‘cause of a Pokémon party.”
Twice on the customer service tumblr blog:
Ask: Why do you say you and Phil don’t share clothes, even with about 7 or 8 photos that prove otherwise?
Dan:When you say you ‘share clothes’ with somebody it implies that often you casually wear the other persons clothes instead of your own whenever you like for whatever purpose. Apart form the 2/3 identical items of clothing me and Phil wear and the jogging bottoms I gave him, there is pretty much always a strange/very specific reason. I might be in a ‘costume’ for a video, I might be wearing something because neither of us mind getting ruined, or blahblahblah. Yes, on occasion we will borrow another persons item of clothing because we need to for a specific reason, but we don’t ‘share clothes’ in the way that some of you probably want us to are implying. Either way I don’t see how this is either that important or interesting. xD
Ask: can we just establish that you do, in fact, wear phil’s clothes?!!!! xD
Dan: well not really in the way you’re implying. i don’t ‘wear his clothes’ unless there’s a specific reason for it. we either own the same item of clothing or if it’s for a video then i’m usually dressing as a ‘character’ or wearing something that i don’t want to get wet or something ~ feel free to post this answer in the tag as my head is hurting from banging against the desk every time i see someone go ‘omG they shur clothis!1 PHAN’ xD
And twice regarding the Sonic boxers specifically:
I would just like to make clear xD
that I -am not- wearing Phil’s underwear! o_o lmao
we both own the same pair from Next
after arguing over who should get to have them
we both bought them.
NOW STOP BEING CREEPERS. =p
Comment: “i’d just like to point out that not only is dan wearing phil’s t-shirt he is also wearing his boxers :3”
Dan: no actually paul griffiths sent us both that t-shirt and we both bought those boxers =p you creepers!
[Note Dan’s comment that “paul griffiths sent us both that t-shirt and we both bought those boxers.” The Paul Griffiths part important in light of other statements he’s made.]
---
Q: Is what Dan’s saying true?
A: Not really. Sort of, but it’s very misleading.
First of all, he IS CORRECT that many times when he has worn something that belonged to Phil, it was merely to play a character in a video.
Here are a lot of examples of that kind of clothes-sharing:
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that he would have worn those items of clothing if he weren’t performing a sketch, so imo these don’t really “count” as examples of them “sharing clothes.”
He has also worn Phil’s clothes in several videos where he wasn’t playing a character per se, but maybe something about the video called for a certain type of clothing. For example…
He wanted to look young/like a highschooler?:
They both wanted to wear Halloween clothes but not the same ones as the previous year:
Dan needed a good Christmas jumper:
He and Phil presumably wanted to match:
(Though Phil implies it was a coincidence in this tweet, which would actually be a suggestion that they do casually share clothes lol):
And some instances are even less justifiable, but could still possibly be examples of Dan sharing Phil’s clothes for a specific reason (and one instance of Phil sharing Dan’s!!):
(NOTE: according to Dan, “we own several items of the same clothing, ‘cause we’ve either been given them by somebody like Babycakes, or stuff like that” — which could be interpreted to mean he is claiming that he has his own version of this shirt. Though he has NEVER worn it in any other video. Same goes for the purple Babycakes shirt seen below.)
(A rare instance of Phil in Dan’s clothing! Another example would be the burgundy A&F sweatpants)
Note that Dan also wore this shirt in his Truth or Dare 3 video, likely it is an example of something where “because neither of us mind getting it ruined”:
That being said, there are many, many instances where we have photographic proof that Dan DOES wear Phil’s clothes in a casual way, even when it doesn’t matter what he’s wearing and he’s just lounging around the house or on vacation:
To be fair, a lot of these are from times when Dan was visiting Phil’s house (so he probably had a significantly limited wardrobe with him at the time), or when they were on vacation together (again, limited wardrobe).
Also, Dan refers to “the jogging bottoms I gave him” — presumably the burgundy A&F ones. So according to Dan those don’t count.
But many of these examples have no apparent explanation, except for the explanation that they do indeed “share clothes, you know, like, sisters do, or something like that.”
For example, in the one where he’s wearing Phil’s green sweatshirt, he is not living with Phil and he’s not staying at Phil’s house. He is at Uni, which means that he had to intentionally borrow it from Phil. Also, it’s noteworthy that this seems to be Phil’s go-to hoodie for when he’s ill. He wears it in “Man Flu” and in a liveshow where he’s sick (the Toxic liveshow lol). Aww.
You’ll notice I picked an example of him wearing the orange Babycakes t-shirt from somewhere other than the pancakes video.
Which brings us to…
Everything you could ever want to know about the Babycakes t-shirts.
Dan and Phil own, between them, five Babycakes t-shirts (Dan would have you believe there are duplicates involved; this is dubious):
The orange one gets the most attention. Let’s examine Dan’s mutually-exclusive claims about this t-shirt (complete quotes cited above):
1) “And for that one video, I borrowed his Babycakes t-shirt because everything I own is black and I wanted to not look boring”
2) “no actually paul griffiths sent us both that t-shirt”
Which version is the truth?
Well, Phil mentions in his video “Worst Birthday EVER!!” (February 15, 2010) that he was given five Babycakes t-shirts for his birthday:
2:29 - “Also I want to say a quick thanks to Paul Griffiths (who lives down the road!) who sent me five Babycakes t-shirts!”
He then shows brief clips of himself in four of the t-shirts.
And Dan commented on the video: “I apologise to you all for stealing the 5th bbycks t-shirt that he couldn’t show you xD”
We do indeed have two examples of Dan wearing the elusive 5th Babycakes t-shirt in videos:
Source: Now-privated video called “LET’S HAVE A QUICKIE” from April 30, 2010
Dan’s early comments (“I apologise to you all for stealing the 5th bbycks t-shirt that he couldn’t show you xD” and “for that one video, I borrowed his Babycakes t-shirt because everything I own is black and I wanted to not look boring”) both suggest that Paul Griffiths gave Phil five t-shirts and Dan “stole” one of them. Which would mean Dan was lying when he later claimed, twice, that they were BOTH gifted he orange shirt (and possibly other babycakes shirts as well). If he’s not lying later, then he was lying when he said he “borrowed Phil’s Babycakes t-shirt,” but why would he have lied about that?
So, in conclusion:
Yes, Dan and Phil share clothes. That much is certain.
What is up for debate are Dan’s motivations. Sometimes, Dan only borrows Phil’s clothes for videos. Other times, he seemingly borrows them just for fun / convenience / sentimental reasons. Dan has vastly downplayed the frequency with which he borrows Phil’s clothes and made it sound like he does it only when forced to by logistical factors or the need to give different characters costumes in his sketch videos. This is clearly not true. He’s also blatantly lied — regardless of which tale is the truth, it is undeniable that he has said contradictory things.
It’s not a big deal that Dan and Phil share clothes (except maybe the underwear…), but Dan made it a big deal by denying it.
Also note: The last instance I can find of a blatant clothes-sharing denial is October 2013. That was more than two years ago. He has borrowed Phil’s clothes several times since then, in very overt ways. So possibly he’s left this phase behind him.
Maybe even in 2013 he was starting leaving it behind, as he kind of alludes lightheartedly (?) to borrowing Phil’s glasses in this tweet from October 2, 2013 (also about the “Cringe Attack” video:
BONUS:
I often see these cited as examples of Dan and Phil sharing clothes. They are not in fact the same items of clothing, if you look closely!
SOURCES FOR ALL PHOTOS/VIDEOS OF BORROWED CLOTHES UNDER THIS SPOILER
(I generally only cite instances of the borrower in the clothes, because examples of the actual owner wearing the clothing item are plentiful, but sometimes I just gave examples for both of them, especially for more obscure articles of clothing)
Phil’s green and black check shirt
• Dan = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElPqY0emgFU
• (Phil wears it in the same video — they filmed it over the course of two days; Dan wears it the first day and Phil wears it the second day)
syzygy wrote:also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
That stuck out to me as well. If I were in Louise's shoes I wouldn't be very happy about that. I mean what a great surprise, going to a restaurant you didn't chose and have to pay for yourself. Yeah I don't get that. If I had organized something like that for my friend, I certainly would have paid for them as well. Just very strange in my eyes.
random thoughts because I couldn't begin to keep up with you guys and Tumblr last night
- loved loved LOVED both of the videos, Louise is an utter gem & i've already seen both videos... well, let's say a few times.
- yes, there was some awkwardness in the collab with all three of them, but for me personally, it wasn't awkwardness I was uncomfortable with. I like that D&P aren't your typical, glamorous Youtubers who seem to always know what to say and come off clinically perfect.
- Phil did say less, but I definitely didn't get the same vibe of annoyence you could sense from like the "Can Phil express an opinion" pannel, he seemed fine within his awkward range, the difference (imo) being that he likes both Dan and Louise & is content letting them talk over one another occasionally. there are just people like that in friend groups, not everyone needs or desires to be waffling on and on. (hell, even when he was talking, he still took the time to ask Louise a question, that does not strike me as a person deprived of space for talking.)
- I did love the moments where he seemed to just be having too much fun to mold himself into a wall of persona, like the scalp massage and laughing at Dan's dirty remarks, it was a joy to see - and this time, the cacti and the plushies felt self-referencial rather than distracting and where in for just the right amount of time.
- this has been said many a time, but wow, Dan talking about slowly dropping hints he's a furry... wow. And Phil's face is so priceless when he says it.
- one more re: Phil & talking - when Dan fisted his mouth (will I ever get tired of typing that? probably not), he couldn't stop talking, kept making really 3rd grader remarks about olympics and record books and it definitely felt like he was trying to fill up the conversation so that nobody had the space to make the really obvious remark
- the jumpcut to them laughing after after Louise stuck her tongue out makes me think a really glorious it's-unfortunate-you're-straight-Louise remark didn't make the cut
- nobody can convice me that "get naked gentlemen" wasn't referential to a joint massage
- Louise's reaction to imaging having sex with Dan (and Phil) was so... fascinating. Because a then-single (for a few more weeks anyway) female imagining having sex with her two hot friends... why so weirded out? Unless they're too togehter for you to even comprehend that...
- And Dan as well, like honestly, the way he seemed so thrown off by imagining sex with Louise and so very comfy with not even making any remarks about being uncomfortable with the Phil of it all...
- I need the other two videos SO badly, cannot wait, it'll be glorious I'm betting, they seemed to be in a wonderful mood
- re: Dan & bisexuality - it's hard for me to say, because I am bi and the idea of them being bi is really close to my heart. I can't blame people for considering other options that are non-straight though, labels change, people change, people grow, that whole ordeal. That being said, personally, I think that Dan's trying to overwrite his no homo past with these comments, and as they're selected to do that, it doesn't feel important to mention attraction women at the moment. There's a giddiness to realizing you can mention stuff that you felt like you couldn't all of a sudden. But we'll see... Hopefully, someday.
syzygy wrote:also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
That stuck out to me as well. If I were in Louise's shoes I wouldn't be very happy about that. I mean what a great surprise, going to a restaurant you didn't chose and have to pay for yourself. Yeah I don't get that. If I had organized something like that for my friend, I certainly would have paid for them as well. Just very strange in my eyes.
absolutely. Seems like a dick move to me, on the whole, because you're like, "I'm going to make you spend an absurd amount of money!". Makes absolutely no sense to me.
syzygy wrote:also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
That stuck out to me as well. If I were in Louise's shoes I wouldn't be very happy about that. I mean what a great surprise, going to a restaurant you didn't chose and have to pay for yourself. Yeah I don't get that. If I had organized something like that for my friend, I certainly would have paid for them as well. Just very strange in my eyes.
A posh place like that is also like the worst environment for a semi-large group of people to 'catch up' in. They apparently all hadn't seen each other (or Louise anyway) in a while and wanted to have fun night with friends. A cheaper, more casual place would just have been better for the occasion the start with. Louise's friend was lovely planning that for her, but I wouldn't be very impressed if I just wanted to go out with friends and have a laid back meal somewhere, only to the get dragged out of my comfort zone into a fancy restaurant where I have to pay 130 pounds for a meal I didn't ask for.
syzygy wrote:also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
That stuck out to me as well. If I were in Louise's shoes I wouldn't be very happy about that. I mean what a great surprise, going to a restaurant you didn't chose and have to pay for yourself. Yeah I don't get that. If I had organized something like that for my friend, I certainly would have paid for them as well. Just very strange in my eyes.
absolutely. Seems like a dick move to me, on the whole, because you're like, "I'm going to make you spend an absurd amount of money!". Makes absolutely no sense to me.
I also thought it was weird that Dan (presumedly?) knew that Louise hates surprises and went along with it. Not accusing him of anything, as it would have been weird for him to warn her (though her sister didn't seem to mind) and just as weird to turn down the offer for her only to find out he could have came but didn't. Also, I suppose everyone else knew that she hated surprises too but went along with it. Perhaps they knew she didn't like surprises but not to the degree to bring her to tears, so they really did think it was all in good fun.
Also, like, if I were her sister and knew about the joke, I would not have accepted the offer for her to pay for my meal. Then again, I guess you could make the argument that Louise does have more money than your average person, so it is different, but still. I would have been much more peeved about the whole thing than Louise let on.
Last edited by greatnessflicker on Sat Apr 16, 2016 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
syzygy wrote:also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
That stuck out to me as well. If I were in Louise's shoes I wouldn't be very happy about that. I mean what a great surprise, going to a restaurant you didn't chose and have to pay for yourself. Yeah I don't get that. If I had organized something like that for my friend, I certainly would have paid for them as well. Just very strange in my eyes.
A posh place like that is also like the worst environment for a semi-large group of people to 'catch up' in. They apparently all hadn't seen each other (or Louise anyway) in a while and wanted to have fun night with friends. A cheaper, more casual place would just have been better for the occasion the start with. Louise's friend was lovely planning that for her, but I wouldn't be very impressed if I just wanted to go out with friends and have a laid back meal somewhere, only to the get dragged out of my comfort zone into a fancy restaurant where I have to pay 130 pounds for a meal I didn't ask for.
Absolutely, the idea was lovely, but very poor execution. At least they were able to make a video out of it though, so there's a silver lining.
syzygy wrote:also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
That stuck out to me as well. If I were in Louise's shoes I wouldn't be very happy about that. I mean what a great surprise, going to a restaurant you didn't chose and have to pay for yourself. Yeah I don't get that. If I had organized something like that for my friend, I certainly would have paid for them as well. Just very strange in my eyes.
agreed that stuck out to me as well. Is it cultural maybe? like I know in certain places when you invite people for your bday to the restaurant, you pay for them and in other places your friends pay for you. I find it even more uncomfortable that she had to pay for 2 tho as she had invited her sister without knowing the restaurant. Maybe they could have paid for Louise and then let her pay for her sister at least.
I don't think that's strange at all to be weirded out by the thought of having sex with your friends. Even if you're single and they're hot that just really strange to me. On the contrary, that she imagined it like that in both videos actually surprised me ngl
If you’re attracted to somebody, you’ll want them to sniff you eventually - Dan
*Phil is turned on by Dan's brilliance* *they kiss* *they have sex in the microwave* - Oqua (actually Phil)
IckleMissMayhem wrote:
starlight-still "nosh" to me is a BJ. As in: "nosh [s.o.] off" Welks.
You know, this is what we're all about here on idb: bantz, of course, but also a bit of cultural exchange, a bit of education thrown in the mix... omg it really only means 'eating' or 'snacking' how i've used it now i realize the other day when i was like 'popcorn noshin' dan' and phil...really?
I have a confession to make: I still don't see Phil (even AP) as this innocent/smol/precious/awkward man-child thing that everyone seems to see him as? Maybe it's because I've seen everything from 2009-10 videos to recent AP-heavy ones in the span of a couple of months, plus all of his recent tweets, plus stuff like the freaking vibrating moment from undertale
Everyone talks about him like he's Raffi (no disrespect to Raffi )...but I just don't see it? If anything, Dan's the one that comes across to me that way. as in slightly sweary "pooh bear" you know?
Re: the in the Geisha Girl drink...dan dan dan you know your fandom too well
Same! This is why I'm confused when people call Phil 'sunshine' and 'adorable', because I don't see him like that.I know that he has immature aspects to his personality, but that so far has not made him adorable to me.
daphenaxa wrote::thanks: agreed that stuck out to me as well. Is it cultural maybe? like I know in certain places when you invite people for your bday to the restaurant, you pay for them and in other places your friends pay for you. I find it even more uncomfortable that she had to pay for 2 tho as she had invited her sister without knowing the restaurant. Maybe they could have paid for Louise and then let her pay for her sister at least.
I don't think that's strange at all to be weirded out by the thought of having sex with your friends. Even if you're single and they're hot that just really strange to me. On the contrary, that she imagined it like that in both videos actually surprised me ngl
I think the protocol is that usually whoever organizes the thing pays for it. Like, a surprise birthday party means that your friends pay for it, and inviting someone to a party means that you'll pay for it.
syzygy wrote:also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
That stuck out to me as well. If I were in Louise's shoes I wouldn't be very happy about that. I mean what a great surprise, going to a restaurant you didn't chose and have to pay for yourself. Yeah I don't get that. If I had organized something like that for my friend, I certainly would have paid for them as well. Just very strange in my eyes.
agreed that stuck out to me as well. Is it cultural maybe? like I know in certain places when you invite people for your bday to the restaurant, you pay for them and in other places your friends pay for you. I find it even more uncomfortable that she had to pay for 2 tho as she had invited her sister without knowing the restaurant. Maybe they could have paid for Louise and then let her pay for her sister at least.
I don't think that's strange at all to be weirded out by the thought of having sex with your friends. Even if you're single and they're hot that just really strange to me. On the contrary, that she imagined it like that in both videos actually surprised me ngl
It felt a bit strange to me, too, but either they changed the story to be funnier (like Louise's Big Tragic Day of Fails) or were just uncomfortable talking about how D&P may have no actual problem dropping over 500 pounds for a meal or it might be an unspoken rule for the YT community that you just pay for yourself - esp. in a company of people with really varied incomes, like there where YTers there with millions of followers, Louise being one of them, and then also ones with far less than that, like say Hazel's just about to reach 200k. Or they offered and Louise didn't want that but they chose not to include it in the video for reasons. Who knows.
Idk, everyone in the YT community is so weird about money because fandoms and humans in general are really weird about money, I was pleasantly surprised they even went there.
phamnotof wrote:
Idk, everyone in the YT community is so weird about money because fandoms and humans in general are really weird about money, I was pleasantly surprised they even went there.
RE DINOF video pitch: That is really strange. With final cut pro, you would have to deliberately change the audio, I don't think there's a shortcut that he accidently pressed or clicked. The video processing thing might be true but I've never seen that happen before.
RE Louise paying for her own meal: I found it really strange too. I know they made reservations, but the fact that Louise had a full-on breakdown and they still decided to go? Seems a bit off to me, unless they were slightly exaggerating the breakdown beforehand.
Maybe at the end, since they accidently ordered off the wrong menu, they decided that everyone would just pay for themselves. Idk. I still wonder how thy even managed to order their ENTIRE meal off of the wrong menu, all 9 of them... the whole thing is weird tbh. I do feel bad for Louise though. I would have felt sick the entire time knowing that I had no luggage/clean clothes/makeup to go back to.
Phil Lester wrote:"I'll rub myself in a mango before I eat a mango."
"Make no judgements where you have no compassion." -Anne McCaffrey
phamnotof wrote:It felt a bit strange to me, too, but either they changed the story to be funnier (like Louise's Big Tragic Day of Fails) or were just uncomfortable talking about how D&P may have no actual problem dropping over 500 pounds for a meal or it might be an unspoken rule for the YT community that you just pay for yourself - esp. in a company of people with really varied incomes, like there where YTers there with millions of followers, Louise being one of them, and then also ones with far less than that, like say Hazel's just about to reach 200k. Or they offered and Louise didn't want that but they chose not to include it in the video for reasons. Who knows.
Idk, everyone in the YT community is so weird about money because fandoms and humans in general are really weird about money, I was pleasantly surprised they even went there.
Yeah, I was definitely pleasantly surprised by the fact that they talked about money. It's not an easy topic of conversation, and it's nice that they talked about it. But, I don't know if they changed the story to be funnier. I don't think people paid for each other, tbh. I think it would have been something they talked about if it did happen. I mean, people paying for louise would just make sense, imo, and, there's no reason for Dan and Phil to take care of the bill, because they weren't the ones who organized the thing.
oqua wrote:T
2. (14:45) I think Dan expected Louise to go along with his claim that they ate all the butter. This is probably the kind of white lie he and Phil tell all the time, because it's funny. I don't know, I just get the feeling that he's probably used to making a not-quite-true statement like that and having Phil just agree with him or even expand on it. But no, Louise was quick to correct him: they didn't eat all the butter, but that's by the by. Bless her, lol.
I just thought this little interaction was intriguing as I have long suspected that Dan and Phil are quite fond of embellishing their stories.
IckleMissMayhem wrote:
So yes, I wouldn't be surprised if Dan was fibbing about the butter either, (and eating habits at other times, unless they both have metabolisms that most people can only dream of! ) She shut that one right the hell down though. Bless. and somebody, or somebodies is fibbing about their height. Can't tell who though.
I do agree D&P embellish stories but in this case I could swear what Louise said was "well we did eat all the butter but that's by the by" so I actually think she was backing up Dan's version of events not calling him out on exaggerating/fibbing.
I don't think what she said makes sense if she was disagreeing because the point she was making before Dan said that was that they gave them too much butter so saying we didn't eat all the butter but that besides the point (by the by) doesn't really make sense because in that case it's not beside the point it's actually the exact point she was making that they gave them more butter then they would need. Plus the sentence after that is her saying it was delicious which again makes more sense if she's saying they ate it all rather then left it.
Anyone else think she was agreeing with him?
syzygy wrote:
also, kinda unrelated but i can't believe they all 'surprised' Louise with a fancy restaurant dinner but didn't pay for her meal. surely the point of surprising a friend with a meal at a posh restaurant is that you cover their food? maybe the 'treat' aspect was inviting all of her friends, but still, i feel like a reservation at a Michelin star restaurant is something that you need to be forewarned about, especially when you end up having to pay for yourself.
I couldn't agree more. Maybe it's different if you are all fairly wealthy but for me surprising someone with something that is going to cost them a fortune is just not something you do, if something is going to cost a lot of money and you aren't paying you need to know if it's something they actually want to do!
And it was quite clear that while Louise and Dan were trying to say some nice things (because the friend in question is probably going to see the video) neither found the meal particularly enjoyable and would have rather went to the pizza place.
Also if I'm right in thinking the girl next to Phil in Hazel's blog is Louise's sister then Louise actually may have got screwed with the decision to split the bill equally because while they are having expensive cocktails and wine that person appears to be drinking water.
pearshaped34 wrote:Maybe it's different if you are all fairly wealthy but for me surprising someone with something that is going to cost them a fortune is just not something you do, if something is going to cost a lot of money and you aren't paying you need to know if it's something they actually want to do!
idk, if you're rich, then I see it as even more reason to pay for the person you're surprising. I mean, maybe it's the fact that I come from a collectivist society, but from what I've seen, the really rich people are even more likely to pay for the thing they organized? idk, the whole surprise thing where you have to pay for yourself seems like a rip off to me.
pearshaped34 wrote: I do agree D&P embellish stories but in this case I could swear what Louise said was "well we did eat all the butter but that's by the by" so I actually think she was backing up Dan's version of events not calling him out on exaggerating/fibbing.
Anyone else think she was agreeing with him?
I'm with you on this, because that's what I heard as well. She was agreeing with him, so this time it appeared that his story was true and not embellished.
Why did he even bother to deny that he wears Phil's clothes in the first place? It wouldn't have ever been weird if he had never denied it.
) She shut that one right the hell down though. Bless. 
