Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Our two favourite full time internet nerds who never go outside!
Locked
User avatar
Susanisnotafish
phabergé
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:39 am
Pronouns: She/her
Location: Illinois, USA

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by Susanisnotafish » Tue May 09, 2017 8:25 am

capybantsa wrote::tinfoil:

Dan to me seems like he has more experience with girls but is actually more into guys. Phil seems the opposite. Phil has also always seemed more comfortable with his sexuality, but then he's always seemed more secure in himself than Dan in general.

Anybody else get this vibe/impression?
I agree with your Dan opinion. I feel like Phil hasn't had much experience with girls or guys, but he seems more interested in guys to me. Also have always thought phil was much more secure about himself than Dan, perhaps due to being older?
"Rub those freckles all over me!" --Daniel Howell



User avatar
fondsmiles
phabergé
Posts: 278
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:10 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Germany

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by fondsmiles » Tue May 09, 2017 8:32 am

Here's a thing I'd like to add to the discussion:
aromantic and asexual people do exist. and sexuality is fluid. Not saying that for me those options seem like the most likely for DnP right now, but that doesn't mean they couldn't be true.
Seeing the argument that since they're mid-20/30 by now, there's no other way than for them to desire a romantic and/or sexual partner to settle down with, sits just uncomfortably with me. Or that they wouldn't platonically stay by each other's side for so long if they "could get anyone else, they're both attractive" - yeah, sure, doesn't mean they'd necessarily want that.

Again, not what I personally believe; there's been quite a lot of mentions of attraction to people, and they've both been quite sexual in the past and/or present. But I'd just love if "they're not having anyone else by now so that means they must be romantically/sexually involved" would be an argument, without acknowledging that there's definitely other possible explanations.

I absolutely love these discussions here btw, they make me uncomfortable and question my actions and beliefs by all those different opinions that are being expressed. Thank you to everyone who contributes, I feel like it's really making me grow as a person!
Image
[x]
Image
[x]

gnostic
philussy
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:40 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by gnostic » Tue May 09, 2017 8:38 am

fondsmiles wrote:Here's a thing I'd like to add to the discussion:
aromantic and asexual people do exist. and sexuality is fluid. Not saying that for me those options seem like the most likely for DnP right now, but that doesn't mean they couldn't be true.
Seeing the argument that since they're mid-20/30 by now, there's no other way than for them to desire a romantic and/or sexual partner to settle down with, sits just uncomfortably with me. Or that they wouldn't platonically stay by each other's side for so long if they "could get anyone else, they're both attractive" - yeah, sure, doesn't mean they'd necessarily want that.

Again, not what I personally believe; there's been quite a lot of mentions of attraction to people, and they've both been quite sexual in the past and/or present. But I'd just love if "they're not having anyone else by now so that means they must be romantically/sexually involved" would be an argument, without acknowledging that there's definitely other possible explanations.

I absolutely love these discussions here btw, they make me uncomfortable and question my actions and beliefs by all those different opinions that are being expressed. Thank you to everyone who contributes, I feel like it's really making me grow as a person!
I didn't read the last few pages of this discussion but to be fair, this discussion does not exist in a vacuum. If we were raising these questions applied to 2 generic dudes your critisicm would have been fair. However, when the conversation is about Dan and Phil specifically, people come to it already informed by the fact they are sexual people as voluntarily expressed several times. So that's why asexuality is not on people's minds
Just here for the marketing skills

User avatar
captainspacecoat
woodland creature
Posts: 586
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 2:31 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Australia

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by captainspacecoat » Tue May 09, 2017 9:18 am

Wow, interesting discussion!

Personally, I find it difficult to interpret dnp's recent behaviour as anything other than suggestive of them being in a relationship. Sure, it is absolutely plausible that two platonic friends would plan to buy a "forever home" and adopt a dog together (a la Mitch and Scott and their pet cat they bought together), and I'm certainly not casting judgment on those who do so, but it seems much less likely given the wider context of dnp.

To me, given their early internet history + the vday video (which I have never been able to see as fake) + their recent shift in behaviour + the amount of times Dan has recently spent with Phil's family (nights at the theatre and days at the museum, Phil's bday at Isle of Man etc) + them moving into their third place together + Dan including Phil in his plans to eventually adopt a dog and buy a place + etc etc etc so much more, the most obvious explanation is that they are in a relationship and for a myriad of understandable reasons aren't willing to be 100% open about it. I fully acknowledge that this isn't fact, and is just my interpretation, and may very well be wrong, but it feels like the most simple explanation and trying to explain it as platonic behaviour or exaggerated by the phandom or staged by dnp feels like such a reach to me.

re: Phil's sexuality - I actually disagree that his female attraction mentions are more natural than his male attraction mentions. Like kuensukki said, his constant references to Sarah Michelle Gellar back in the day felt pretty on-brand, and the way he spoke about dating/women he found attractive in live shows (e.g. the woman at the hairdressers? I can't remember properly) came across as quite childish or immature to me. Not that that discounts them, I'm not disputing that Phil is actually attracted to women, but I wouldn't call them 'natural' necessarily in comparison to his more recent references to men.

Also wanted to say, it makes sense to me that his male attraction references may come across as a bit awkward or unnatural. They are even more recent than Dan's - there's a reason for that. I'm sure he knows how they'll be interpreted, and it must be at least somewhat nerve-wracking to start consciously (or unconsciously I guess, who knows) implying attraction to men on such a public level when for such a long period of time he attempted to imply heterosexuality. I'm bi and not out to most people in my life, and after such a long period of time trying to deny my bisexuality by only mentioning attraction to men, I do feel kind of weird making comments about women I find attractive. I think it's easy to brush over how daunting it can be to make yourself vulnerable like that, and to imply that you are not straight. Even if Phil has been open about his sexuality with his friends/family before, it's another thing entirely to do so in front of millions of obsessive fans.

In summary: I think it's easier to explain dnp's behaviour as indicative of them being in a long-term relationship and wanting to maintain privacy despite somewhat loosening their boundaries in recent months than it is to explain it as them being platonic pals who want to spend more than the foreseeable future together and make long term commitments with one another, and bisexuality is complicated + nuanced meaning it is understandable to me that Phil's male attraction mentions may be interpreted as less natural than his female attraction mentions (which weren't all that natural in the first place, in my opinion)

User avatar
kalli
spork
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:57 am
Location: Canada

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by kalli » Tue May 09, 2017 9:38 am

Wow, there's definitely a variety of opinions going on here. For me, it would be somewhat situational depending on their motives for not putting a stop to it and how much they had intentionally contributed to the ongoing platonic vs romantic discussion.

Surely they know that a lot of people see their denial of being in a romantic relationship from 5 or so years ago as them protecting their relationship in the aftermath of the voldy leak. So if they have never wanted people to believe they're together, they're not doing a very good job at it if they brushed it off after a few fuelled attempts and hardly tried again after things calmed down. It wouldn't have been that hard for them to sit down together for a couple minutes, and express in a calm, straightforward manner to their audience that they are not a couple and do not want people to believe they are in a romantic relationship. Maybe in some people's eyes they have been giving these consistent clear statements, but that's definitely not what I'm seeing. The angry tumblr posts, some "I'm not gay" assertions, and a few mentions of having separate beds or rooms in hotels are all things of the past, and none of it is very persuasive or substantial when given context, in my opinion.

While it sucks that they sort of have this lingering obligation to clarify that their relationship is platonic if they are actually just friends, it would save them from a lot of the backlash they'd receive (queerbaiting accusations, angry shippers, people who generally feel mislead, etc.) if they were to admit they're not in a romantic relationship, contrary to the belief of a huge portion of their fanbase, with so little forewarning. It's not that difficult to say you're not in a relationship, but to say you are can sometimes be. I don't see any benefits to leaving their relationship status ambiguous if they aren't actually a couple, other than to bank off the speculation, which is where I would begin to disagree with their actions. It's much closer to the territory of the whole thing being a scheme they've planted to make money, rather than an "is what it is" situation where they're repeatedly attempted to tell people they're not in a relationship and people are choosing to believe in it anyway.

As I began to say at the start of the post, my reaction to finding out they're not in romantic relationship would depend on the situation. If the whole thing was some sort of ploy to form an audience from the start, I wouldn't stick around. If they admitted to having a thing at the start and decided to be just friends but have intentionally egged us on in recent years for views, I'd feel a bit used and I'm fairly certain I'd lose interest. If they came forth with other partners, moved apart or did something to make it clear they're not together without much of an explanation, I'd be a bit confused and it would depend on what content came in the aftermath. If their stay in this apartment is very temporary (as in max a year) and they get an old dog which will probably only live a couple years and isn't much of commitment, plus they explained that they had a thing at the beginning, everything would check out to me and I wouldn't be bothered. Lastly, if they admit to being together in the beginning (or at least offer some sort substantial explanation for the tweets, formspring answers, v-day video, etc. from 2009/2010) and have a pact to marry each other if they're still single by a certain age which may or may not play out but they're already joking about it, I'd just laugh it off with them and I wouldn't feel differently about them.

I think it's mainly a personal thing, and I'm quite positive we're all in agreement that someone can come and go from a fandom as they please no matter the reason. It's difficult to name anything most would distinctly incorrect with any of these scenarios, but any sort of deliberate trickery would likely drive me away. It's one thing to be dishonest to protect yourself, but to plant seeds that they're together entirely for the views/money doesn't sit that well with me

(Hopefully this made sense because it's 5am and I'm quite tired.)

On a somewhat related note, I'm kinda glad this topic came up because I've only really noticed people say that they think Dan's technically either bi or pan, but I've always felt like he's either gay or bi but way more into men than women. I can't remember the last time he has expressed attraction toward a women, and it always felt really unnatural to me whenever he did. And this might be a bit of a reach, but I find it weird that in his diss track he says "your celebrity crush was J-Law, but now it's Evan P" when he could have easily said something like "your celebrity crush is J-Law, but also Evan P" to keep it even. Has this ever been discussed? I wasn't part of idb when it was uploaded and I've never gone back to the thread at the time to check, but people on other platforms seemed to take it as implying that he's bi and I read into it much differently.

As for Phil, I feel like he's most likely bi and that his attraction to men and women is pretty evenly split, but maybe that he's ever so slightly more often drawn to women. Although there's not much to base this off so reality could surprise us all.

Quick update on my thoughts on #BahamasGate: I'm now more convince that he actually went. Still confused as to why, but I like the modelling theory
I was watching this strange game show earlier called The Wall which features a couple working together, one answering trivia questions in isolation, completely unaware if their answers are correct, and the other making bets on how likely it is their partner will answer the question correctly based purely on seeing the multiple choice answers to the question. There's balls that fall down this wall like a plinko board and land into slots with different amounts of money, which are either added to your total if the question is answered correctly or taken away if incorrect. It's the most extra and chaotic game show I've ever seen and it probably sounds confusing without seeing it, but what I'm getting at is I think Deppy would do well. I've been imagining Phil answering the trivia and poor Dan on the outside making bets and stressing out watching Phil answer the questions. Is there any game show phanfiction?

plath
sofa crease
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:42 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by plath » Tue May 09, 2017 10:40 am

awsugar wrote:
alittledizzy wrote:I'm loving this entire RPF analysis conversation, and I want to come back to it when I have a bit more time to write my thoughts. Couldn't resist replying to this, though - just because it's a topic I spend a lot of time thinking about in terms of fan behavior.
starry nightworld wrote:I guess the thing that makes me sad is the frequency of outright threats that people would stop being Dan and Phil fans if they turned out not to be together. Because Dan and Phil have been lying or something despite them repeatedly denying being together. You can only imagine the havoc which would ensue if either of them produced a girlfriend/boyfriend.

Which is quite depressing given that this is Dan and Phil's livelihood which supports them and indirectly Martin and Cornelia. To think that they might feel afraid that shippers could try to ruin the careers they worked so hard to build is really sad.
Do you think fans have a responsibility to keep consuming content and supporting creators, if it turns out that the thing they were invested in them for isn't actual real? I'm curious as to why.

I as much as said this in a recent post, but if it turned out that Dan and Phil were the kind of people who genuinely made the Valentine's Day video because they thought it would be legitimately funny to parody a m/m relationship, or that Dan was the kind of person who legitimately expressed his distaste for the idea of him being in a relationship with Phil in the ways he did in 2012 without it being because of some deeper-rooted closeted situation, then that changes my perception of Dan and Phil as people. In my mind, the actions they took in late 2011 through 2013 were because they were closeted, not to a comfortable point of financial or professional stability and afraid of how being outed would impact their career, and most likely just plain not ready for that pressure of being publicly out. I can rationalize that from four years ago because I have their current behavior, with regard to sexuality individually and each other, to provide a counterpoint.

But before I get off on too much of a tangent, my basic point is: I don't feel like it's sad for me to say that if I realized I had misjudged what I thought the character of a famous person to be so drastically, that it would cause me to evaluate if I wanted to continue supporting them. It seems more unhealthy to me to be the type of fan who has one viewpoint, unwavering, no matter what new information comes to light, or who feels like the only way to be a good fan is to not be a critical one. I'm definitely open to hearing other viewpoints, though. :)
tbh i completely agree. i usually don't like to say it but if it turned out that they weren't together, i probably wouldn't feel inclined to watch their videos anymore.

and it's not because i only enjoy their videos for their relationship or the speculation of their relationship. it's because if it turns out that they are not, i would pretty much lose respect for them.

they know exactly how things come across and they know exactly what their fans are going to take out of every interaction they have with each other. they have the power to choose to put or not to put every single part of their videos into the final cut of the video. they have specifically chosen to be more comfortable around each other and put in deliberate mentions of male attraction into their videos. they know how heavily they are shipped together and they know that if they hint repeatedly that they are attracted to men as well, that their fans will use it as proof that they are together. they don't do much at all to convince us that they are not, anymore. so, as a bisexual myself, i would feel incredibly manipulated. and i wouldn't watch their videos anymore.

just curious: is anyone on this forum a non-believer and also lgbt?? i kind of get the feeling that the only people who could see all that they have done, past and present, think that they're not together and just playing it up for views, and be okay with that, are straight. but maybe i'm wrong.
Woah, a lot of stuff happened last night while I was sleeping. Timezones are dumb :facepalm:

Kinda odd how you think all non shippers are straight tbh? I'm a gay lady. Used to ID as bi until my mid 20s. Haven't thought I was straight since I was in middle school, lol.

It kinda makes me uncomfortable when people say things like 'they know how they come across' because, that's the thing - they don't come across the same way to everyone? Non-shippers don't ship Dan and Phil because we're homophobic (lol), it's because we don't see the same stuff shippers do in their interactions. We don't see any evidence for it in reality.

Dan and maybe also Phil aren't straight but that doesn't automatically mean that they're together. I wish Dan would come out officially because representation but I can understand why he maybe doesn't want to - also because perhaps he knows it'll make the shipping stuff worse because people will take it as confirmation of phan.

I think ultimately there's a lot of confirmation bias going on here. A non shipper is going to interpret everything platonically because that's they already believe, while a shipper is going to see everything as #phanconfirmed. All viewpoints are valid imo, as long as everyone's polite and respectful.

As I've said previously on this forum, if Dan and Phil came out officially and said they were together I'd be happy for them. Personally, it wouldn't be a big deal or change how I viewed them. I'd mostly just be happy to have another few visible out public figures.
nope.

User avatar
blackdenim
procrastinator
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by blackdenim » Tue May 09, 2017 11:17 am

queerofcups wrote:Discussions like this make me miss the fourth wall so, so much. I don't think shipping real people is particularly new or particularly weird, but presenting shipping activities to the people folks are shipping (or demanding that they act in ways that support the ship) makes me really, deeply uncomfortable. I think Twitter is a huge part of what makes it seem like its ok to do such things-- the level of access we have to directly communicating with DnP would've been unimaginable back in the days of bandom and I think its part of why some folks in the fandom are so, ah, fervent.
I know the conversation has likely moved on but I just wanted to say I 100% agree with this post queerofcups! Although real person shipping isn't personally my cup of tea, I don't begrudge anyone else doing it. But I do think it is unacceptable to present it in any way to the people involved but as I've said before (regarding people tweeting deeply sexual things to D&P) the level of access we have to them is unprecedented, but the screen(s) between us make many forget they're actually real people with real feelings, and I think can breed bad behaviour in some people.

User avatar
auri
pumpkin spice pumpkin cookie
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:26 pm
Pronouns: they/them

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by auri » Tue May 09, 2017 11:28 am

This is very interesting discussion you're having, keep it going i have always thought they are both bi or pan, but I have to say that I'm also kind of starting to think that Dan is more into men than women? Idk, maybe I just notice when he talks about men or something. And I have some thoughts of Phil and his orientation and stuff but I don't have time to talk about it rn i'll keep you waiting (until I get my computer back haha).

Do you think Dan is gonna do a ls today or is it safe to assume he won't do it? I'm losing hope for live shows this week, blah. Maybe DAPG video? Please give me the horse prince so that i'd be over. :D i hate to admit that I kind of enjoy the horse videos but mostly i just want it to be over....

User avatar
loonyradish
living flop
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 1:45 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Germany

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by loonyradish » Tue May 09, 2017 11:32 am

kuensukki wrote: capybantsa With women, he acts like a playful friend but with guys it's a little different. He's more conscious and aware of them which I always found interesting.
I'm not sure if that necessarily means that he's (more) attracted to guys. I'm a straight female, but for some reason I'm much more nervous and shy around other females, whereas around males I find it easier to talk and act more "playful". But I don't know, that's only for me, and I feel more "Dan-like" than "Phil-like" mostly. Just saying that it can mean both.
capybantsa wrote::tinfoil:

Dan to me seems like he has more experience with girls but is actually more into guys. Phil seems the opposite. Phil has also always seemed more comfortable with his sexuality, but then he's always seemed more secure in himself than Dan in general.

Anybody else get this vibe/impression?
Same here. I feel like at first it looks like Dan's the one who is more secure, as he is always the more dominant part in videos with both of them, he talks more, he's louder, which leads to Phil being more in the background and appearing to be kinda shy.
But inside, it's actually the opposite. I think Phil doesn't feel the need to talk all the time, because he's way more mentally balanced and stuff, while Dan wants to proof himself.

I don't know if I'm taking my interpretation too far, if so, I'm sorry :? It's just my opinion.

gnostic
philussy
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:40 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by gnostic » Tue May 09, 2017 11:50 am

I have a complicated relationship with my understanding of Dan's sexuality.

Argument can be made, of course, that it's none of my business at all, but we are all hopelessly invasive trash over here at IDB let's be real.

Anyway, from what snippets he gives us, it is reasonable to conclude i think that Dan identified as "queer", bisexual by nature but not into labels (that last tidbit from his memorable "put you into box" section of the diss track).

Yet ever since i started watching Dan, back when i was genuinely of the opinion he presented as straight, I couldn't shake belief that he was gay or at least way more into males. Every single gay man i showed Dan to believed the same. Now i know y'all are about to hit me with "gaydars aren't real / are homophobic", to that end I invite you all to live in Mother Russia as a queer person without a functioning gaydar.

So yeah, if someone asked me what I though Dan's sexuality was I would say queer / bisexual, but
Just here for the marketing skills

plath
sofa crease
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:42 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by plath » Tue May 09, 2017 11:55 am

auri wrote:This is very interesting discussion you're having, keep it going i have always thought they are both bi or pan, but I have to say that I'm also kind of starting to think that Dan is more into men than women? Idk, maybe I just notice when he talks about men or something. And I have some thoughts of Phil and his orientation and stuff but I don't have time to talk about it rn i'll keep you waiting (until I get my computer back haha).

Do you think Dan is gonna do a ls today or is it safe to assume he won't do it? I'm losing hope for live shows this week, blah. Maybe DAPG video? Please give me the horse prince so that i'd be over. :D i hate to admit that I kind of enjoy the horse videos but mostly i just want it to be over....
I'm 99.9% certain Dan is bi but without knowing his dating history, I don't think it's easy to tell whether he's more into men than women. The way he talks about labels not being important makes me think it's not as clear cut to him as being more into one gender than others. Also, a lot of bi people go through phases where they're more interested in one gender, so it's often not as simple as percentages.

Phil is a mystery, I cannot read him. Whether he's gay, straight, bi or ace, I have literally no idea. He could make an announcement tomorrow that he's a sapiosexual space alien and I wouldn't question it.

I think liveshow today seems doubtful - as far as we know they're still abroad, aren't they? And even if Dan flew back today/last night he'd probably be shattered from all that travel malarky and want some rest. Also, the way they were talking about stuff last week it seemed like they were glad to squeeze in a couple of liveshows in before having to dash off again. Sad times.
nope.

User avatar
autumnhearth
lava lamp
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:44 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: OH, USA

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by autumnhearth » Tue May 09, 2017 12:00 pm

Wow. Lots of different angles and perspectives in this discussion. I'm not going to be able to reply to as much as I would like, but I do want to give my support to the fluid sexuality possibility. It is something Dan has talked about in his live show, when a teenager was asking about identifying as asexual for now. His response was great and touched on labeling or not labeling, how temporary labels are okay if they help you express what you feel, that it's fine not to be attracted to anyone or not interested in sex now, but in the future that might change and it's okay to be a formless blob (later in the ls he called himself a formless blob while wrapped up in a blanket).

We know that Dan has had at least one girlfriend and in a video (I forget which one) he was asked about the different types of girls he had dated and he listed like 3-5 including a Goth Wiccan girl. (Which I found interesting). It was a diverse line up, but he said they were all female. We don't know much about his history with guys, besides some rather explicit yet vague formspring answers.
Preferring not to swallow, except to be polite. And does anyone remember the Dailybooth breakfast/fish convo where he was called a "dirty bi-boy" and he replied "I'll exorcise the hetero out of me. As much as I like dem kippers" because I mean...
So I would say it's reasonable to assume Dan's sexuality is fluid, which is something I can personally identify with. I think it is fruitless and a bit disrespectful to try to determine which label: gay, bi, pan or straight is most applicable to him, as they have both stated before that they prefer not to label.

I don't want to speculate too much on Phil's sexuality. He's mentioned plenty of awkward, very young failed attempts to "romance" girls and one college girlfriend that he only had a week, who ditched him for another guy that he became friends with and it was all good. He uses these as antidotes and that's fine. We also know that he was lonely in 2009 when his friends started coupling off and wanted to date someone in the Manchester area and put that out to his viewers. This was right before he and Dan started corresponding more frequently and arranged to meet. He never complained after that, just saying. What I do find interesting is that AmazingPhil's persona comes off a bit asexual (perhaps less so recently), to the point that some people, my husband included assume they may have a romantic nonconsumate relationship. I think he's just very private about sexuality and that's perfectly fine.

Oh look I somehow talked more about Phil than Dan, whoops. Now I have to hop off here and send the child off to school. Great if often uncomfortable discussion. Keep it up.

User avatar
auri
pumpkin spice pumpkin cookie
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:26 pm
Pronouns: they/them

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by auri » Tue May 09, 2017 12:29 pm

plath wrote:
auri wrote:This is very interesting discussion you're having, keep it going i have always thought they are both bi or pan, but I have to say that I'm also kind of starting to think that Dan is more into men than women? Idk, maybe I just notice when he talks about men or something. And I have some thoughts of Phil and his orientation and stuff but I don't have time to talk about it rn i'll keep you waiting (until I get my computer back haha).

Do you think Dan is gonna do a ls today or is it safe to assume he won't do it? I'm losing hope for live shows this week, blah. Maybe DAPG video? Please give me the horse prince so that i'd be over. :D i hate to admit that I kind of enjoy the horse videos but mostly i just want it to be over....
I'm 99.9% certain Dan is bi but without knowing his dating history, I don't think it's easy to tell whether he's more into men than women. The way he talks about labels not being important makes me think it's not as clear cut to him as being more into one gender than others. Also, a lot of bi people go through phases where they're more interested in one gender, so it's often not as simple as percentages.

As a person who labels themselves queer, I am aware of sexuality being fluid. So maybe a better thing to say would be that I think that at this moment Dan prefers men over women or just simply makes more of a fuss over his attraction to men than women. Or maybe, as I said, I only notice when he talks about men. But anyway, when Dan said in one of his live shows that queer is a nice umbrella term (can't remember the actual quote), to me it sounded like he has at least thought of it, probably even thinks of himself as queer. But I don't think dating history has nothing to do with orientation. Many people have never dated anyone, but it doesn't mean they're aro or ace. For the last few years my only crushes and/or dates have been men, but it doesn't mean I am only attracted to men. (Gosh, sometimes expressing myself in english is super hard. I hope I don't sound mean because I'm not trying to be aaahh bear with me, i'm trying my best.)

User avatar
autumnhearth
lava lamp
Posts: 991
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:44 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: OH, USA

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by autumnhearth » Tue May 09, 2017 12:31 pm

loonyradish wrote:
capybantsa wrote::tinfoil:

Dan to me seems like he has more experience with girls but is actually more into guys. Phil seems the opposite. Phil has also always seemed more comfortable with his sexuality, but then he's always seemed more secure in himself than Dan in general.

Anybody else get this vibe/impression?
Same here. I feel like at first it looks like Dan's the one who is more secure, as he is always the more dominant part in videos with both of them, he talks more, he's louder, which leads to Phil being more in the background and appearing to be kinda shy.
But inside, it's actually the opposite. I think Phil doesn't feel the need to talk all the time, because he's way more mentally balanced and stuff, while Dan wants to prove himself.

I don't know if I'm taking my interpretation too far, if so, I'm sorry :? It's just my opinion.
Yes, this! So much this! The first impression is what my husband thinks (from Dan acting more dominant) but I totally agree with you. The husband was talking about it in some heteronormative language that he realizes is not applicable or correct, while offering silly "proof" from gaming choices. Other people talk about it terms of top/bottom, which I am bothered by. However, speaking in terms of personality and general relationship dynamics is great! Dan may be louder in front of a camera, but he's actually the introvert. Phil may appear more reserved or quietly weird next to Dan, but he's actually the people person.

anime_is_not_cool
sofa crease
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by anime_is_not_cool » Tue May 09, 2017 1:07 pm

autumnhearth wrote:So I would say it's reasonable to assume Dan's sexuality is fluid, which is something I can personally identify with. I think it is fruitless and a bit disrespectful to try to determine which label: gay, bi, pan or straight is most applicable to him, as they have both stated before that they prefer not to label.
I also think that some parts of this discussion are kinda pointless. Dan has talked about not labeling himself multiple times during the last year or so (diss track being the most obvious example). Of course phandom does a lot of direspectful things, but I think that this is more like a general issue. Even on this forum there still seem to be people who except Dan to "come out" and label himself. I could be wrong, but I think he has made a very clear statement about this (on the Dan scale ofc. he really seems to hate statements to the point where he doesn't even want to tell his opinions bc they might be wrong, or can't tell when he'll publish a new video without "a meteor could kill me". the sexuality thing has actually been like the one he has been the most obvious during the last year Imo).

I had been struggling with my sexuality for many years before I finally realized that labeling myself only makes me anxious. Dan's example has actually been one of the very few ones I know, and still people speculate about it, even on this forum that's usually very good at connecting hints and finding the truth. Also he is a good example of "straight people don't have to announce their sexuality so why should we". (Why do I feel like this is the 38489th time I'm reading this discussion? Please, , we need water and sunlight. Idb isn't a nice place during droughts :D)

VengefulBlue
rainbow nerd
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 3:59 am
Pronouns: they/them

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by VengefulBlue » Tue May 09, 2017 1:32 pm

ah, such massive change to wake up to! /sarcasm

on labels: dan doesn't like labels, phil doesn't seem to like sharing private details, they aren't coming out, that is all. in all seriousness, dan did talk as though he thinks of himself as "queer", and i like that a lot as that's how i describe myself (plus "amorphous blob", thanks for that, dan). phil hasn't denied anything but also has always seemed to have more defined boundaries of public vs private information.

on sexual/platonic partnerships: i don't care? if they do it , i hope they have fun. if they don't do it but they like cuddles, i hope that's comfy. if they have secret partners, i hope their partners love them and they get along well. honestly, i interpret their actions as those of a romantic/queerplatonic couple, but if that's not the case that's fine. also! you don't have to be ace to be in a nonsexual romantic relationship, so that could be a thing. you can have different sexual and romantic orientations.

User avatar
papierklemmen
flower crown
Posts: 730
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 11:04 am

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by papierklemmen » Tue May 09, 2017 1:33 pm

anime_is_not_cool wrote:Idb isn't a nice place during droughts :D)
lol phil literally uploaded a video YESTERDAY.

plath
sofa crease
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:42 pm

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by plath » Tue May 09, 2017 1:37 pm

auri wrote: As a person who labels themselves queer, I am aware of sexuality being fluid. So maybe a better thing to say would be that I think that at this moment Dan prefers men over women or just simply makes more of a fuss over his attraction to men than women. Or maybe, as I said, I only notice when he talks about men. But anyway, when Dan said in one of his live shows that queer is a nice umbrella term (can't remember the actual quote), to me it sounded like he has at least thought of it, probably even thinks of himself as queer. But I don't think dating history has nothing to do with orientation. Many people have never dated anyone, but it doesn't mean they're aro or ace. For the last few years my only crushes and/or dates have been men, but it doesn't mean I am only attracted to men. (Gosh, sometimes expressing myself in english is super hard. I hope I don't sound mean because I'm not trying to be aaahh bear with me, i'm trying my best.)
Oh, that's a good point. Sorry, I'm half asleep today - I didn't mean to imply that dating history determines orientation, it's just additional information I thought might would be useful. But you're totally right that it's got nothing to do with orientation.
anime_is_not_cool wrote:I also think that some parts of this discussion are kinda pointless. Dan has talked about not labeling himself multiple times during the last year or so (diss track being the most obvious example). Of course phandom does a lot of direspectful things, but I think that this is more like a general issue. Even on this forum there still seem to be people who except Dan to "come out" and label himself. I could be wrong, but I think he has made a very clear statement about this (on the Dan scale ofc. he really seems to hate statements to the point where he doesn't even want to tell his opinions bc they might be wrong, or can't tell when he'll publish a new video without "a meteor could kill me". the sexuality thing has actually been like the one he has been the most obvious during the last year Imo).

I had been struggling with my sexuality for many years before I finally realized that labeling myself only makes me anxious. Dan's example has actually been one of the very few ones I know, and still people speculate about it, even on this forum that's usually very good at connecting hints and finding the truth. Also he is a good example of "straight people don't have to announce their sexuality so why should we". (Why do I feel like this is the 38489th time I'm reading this discussion? Please, , we need water and sunlight. Idb isn't a nice place during droughts :D)
That's interesting, I hadn't considered that the lack of label might actually help some LGBT people. All I saw it was from my own perspective that more out celebs = more representation = a good thing. Perhaps because I'm slightly older, I've never had a problem with labels. They're not great 100% of the time but they're helpful shortcuts for political action and getting rights.

I'm also not sure I believe in equating straight people norms to LGBT norms - sure, in an ideal world, no-one should have to announce anything and I do believe that maybe in a couple hundred or so years (if the Great Orange One hasn't blown us all up by then) we will get to that point. But for now that's just not the world we live in. Straight people don't have to announce it because it's assumed that everyone is straight, and we need visible LGBT folks to counteract that narrative. Otherwise mainstream society and culture would go back to oppressing and ignoring us like they have done for hundreds of years. It's only through visibility and direct action and centuries of struggle that we've got this far. I have to "come out" constantly to people I meet because I'm femme. Just because I don't fit the stereotypical idea straight people have in their heads of lesbians, it never occurs to them that I could be a lesbian. I can't even have male friends without people asking if we're a couple. It's fucking annoying. We need more visibility to counteract this culture that expects heterosexuality from everyone. But that's a sidebar...

Having said that, I think it's awesome that Dan's lack of labels has helped you. I'm all for that. I have to say that isn't a perspective that I had considered, so thank you for sharing it with me.

I also don't think that anyone should be forced to come out when they're not ready, obviously. I do hope that Dan will one day feel comfortable enough to make a definite statement on his orientation, but if he never does then I'm not going to criticise him for that. That's completely his decision. There's very few wrong ways for LGBT people navigate to the fucked-up society we live in (the main way imo is if it hurts other LGBT people, which Dan definitely doesn't lmao). The only thing worthy of criticism is the heterosexual patriarchy we all live in every day.
nope.

onetruetrash
blobfish
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 3:35 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: the land of eagles and sugar

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by onetruetrash » Tue May 09, 2017 2:00 pm

Okay, wow it has taken forever to read all these comments! I'm gonna just focus on the facts and not just rumors.

Dan's sexuality

Dan said in 2009/2010 that he was bisexual. We only know of him being in relationships with women, but judging by his comment about "swallowing to be polite", we can infer that he's had sex/done sexual things with guys. He identified with this until 2012. He never directly said he wasn't bisexual, but when someone asked him about it, he said that he had been prone to lying about things for attention. He's been ambiguous ever since then, but over the years, he slowly began expressing attraction to guys. Dan never directly addressed his sexuality again until his diss track in 2016 where he said that he has/had crushes on Jennifer Lawrence and Evan Peters. He also mentioned how people keep trying to put him in a box. At this point, it seems like Dan doesn't like to label himself or something along those lines.

Phil's sexuality

There's not much to say about Phil's sexuality. He said in around 2009/2010 that he was bisexual, but didn't really like to label himself. We know he's crushed on girls. The only relationship he has confirmed was with a girl when he was 14 and it wasn't serious and only lasted a week. The only other possible relationship was with charlieskies, who said on Twitter that they dated, but Charlie was known to joke about dating/having sex with other YouTubers, so that probably isn't true. Phil has described both men and women as sexy before and has never went back on his old comment about his sexuality, so there's really no reason it shouldn't apply to him now.

I spent way more time on this than I should've.

User avatar
shoe
intermittent hibernation
intermittent hibernation
Posts: 235
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:06 pm
Pronouns: they/them

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by shoe » Tue May 09, 2017 2:09 pm

capybantsa wrote:

Dan to me seems like he has more experience with girls but is actually more into guys. Phil seems the opposite. Phil has also always seemed more comfortable with his sexuality, but then he's always seemed more secure in himself than Dan in general.

Anybody else get this vibe/impression?
kuensukki wrote:capybantsa I'd agree that Phil is more comfortable around girls as in he's more touchy and friendly than Dan who is just awkward. Watch the Carrie collab, or the Megan one, or even the Hazel one and you can see him grabbing their shoulders and being playful and touchy with them. Even in the younger AP videos with Karina and Anja you can see how comfortable and close he was with them. But in terms of who he's attracted to, the most evidence we have of real life potentials are guys which lead me to believe he was ready to date and settle with a guy in his early uni days. With women, he acts like a playful friend but with guys it's a little different. He's more conscious and aware of them which I always found interesting.
It's hard to quantify, but I also get the impression that Phil isn't primarily attracted to women, I think mainly because of the kind of chemistry he has in his collabs with women. That's just a vague impression though, and could be entirely wrong!

I don't think that Phil is necessarily more secure and comfortable in his sexuality than Dan, I think it's more that he's better at hiding his insecurities. The way that Phil maintains his boundaries means that it's basically impossible to tell whether he's avoiding a topic because he's uncomfortable about it, or because it's something he wants to keep away from his public persona for some other reason. In liveshows Dan tends to let himself get closer to issues he's uncomfortable with before he pulls back, so Dan's discomfort is visible to us in a way Phil never allows his to be. This means that we can't really know what Phil is insecure about, we can only observe where his boundaries are, and notice as he slowly moves them, but his reasons for moving them will remain unknown.

I'd like to take a moment to spon the attraction thread which has been sadly languishing for months now. ( to capybansta for contributing already ) It started as a project to help overcome human confirmation bias, where we tend to be better at remembering the evidence which supports what we already believe. The attraction thread is a place to document all the times Dan or Phil make any expression of attraction, to anyone of any gender, even if it could be dismissed as a joke or just saying that the person is in general attractive. Then the examples are there for anyone to browse through, so that things aren't forgotten about, and people can form their own impressions of Dan and Phil's sexualities based on what they themselves have recently (and not so recently) publicly said.
cocolero wrote:You may resume your fruitful speculations secure in the knowledge that Danny's pasty thighs did indeed grace the Island of Fyre.
New Bahamas theory: Dan is filming/directing/presenting a documentary on the lives of the rich, and went to the Bahamas to film a segment there. I also like the modelling theory.

User avatar
howadorableright
living flop
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 2:00 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: cle

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by howadorableright » Tue May 09, 2017 2:19 pm

dan or phil revealing that they were in a relationship with someone else would ultimately result in a twelvie riot and a detective search to find who that person is, not to mention the loss of views and/or subs. i think that if they were to announce a relationship it would probably mean that they're ready to end their career on YouTube bc it is basically a suicide :/

in regards to deppy's relationship , i strongly believe that they are in a queerplatonic relationship whether they know it or not. have we considered that they don't have a label on their relationship, and they don't know what they are, they just know it works.
sis we been knew

User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 3692
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by alittledizzy » Tue May 09, 2017 2:44 pm

mesmericphilip wrote:in regards to deppy's relationship , i strongly believe that they are in a queerplatonic relationship whether they know it or not. have we considered that they don't have a label on their relationship, and they don't know what they are, they just know it works.
Is there a reason you strongly believe it's queerplatonic? To me, they've both expressed that they've had sexual relationships in the past, and the vday video indicates a sexual relationship was happening at least in 2010.

I'm definitely cool with everyone having their own opinion, not trying to argue you about yours, I'm just genuinely curious because it seems like a very narrow assumption to jump to when a much more obvious answer supported by most of the information we have about their relationship (sex tweets/cherry formspring answers/voldy) is that they're in a typical closeted romantic/sexual relationship.

I think I'm also just very comfortable with the closeted assumption because we're not really in a position to know what they label themselves. The absence of a label shared with their audience, the audience they are not out to, does not indicate to me that they don't label themselves between themselves. (That is, of course, impossible to prove so this is me just me stating my opinion.)

User avatar
xaephan
pumpkin spice pumpkin cookie
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:13 am

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by xaephan » Tue May 09, 2017 2:56 pm

Oh boy, there sure has been a whole lot of discussion going on in this thread. It's been really interesting to see all these different viewpoints!
RPF thoughts
I still have moments of 'oh god what am I doing these are real life humans this is terrible of me to even contemplate any of this' every so often. Though my history of RPF-type shipping started a long while back, I haven't actually had that many ships, and my line in the sand boils down to 'I keep it all strictly in my own sandbox and base my interpretations on their public personas'. By sandbox, I mean that I don't tweet or otherwise contact them directly (I just tend to not engage on social media at all actually), I don't tag with real names or even common fan tags, I don't dig for information about family or friends (unless the information is offered from them directly I consider it off-limits). Public persona is tricky; mostly I mean that I mostly just see the version of them that I ship to be based on the parts of themselves that they're willing to share. I kind of make a distinction between who they really are and the people I have in my head, but with something like YT, the overlap is obviously much larger.

Of course the above is what I strive for, but certain things slip through the cracks. Facts about family that becomes common knowledge in the fandom, the rare fandom tag or two, knowledge gained from fandom scandals, the weird blurriness between real people vs. persona because vlogging-style content, etc. The speculation I tend to engage in is mostly for fun, and I'm not really all that invested in being right--it's mostly for the community and mystery-solving.

I do think RPF fans go too far some times (I miss the fourth wall too haha), but I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with shipping. Someone mentioned how magazines and sites like BuzzFeed constantly speculate about celebrities, and that's something we've come to accept as a part of someone being famous, even if we find it distasteful. I don't tend get into any of the smuttier fanworks, because that's when it gets a bit weird to me for a number of reasons. I'll still partake in fics that contain that sort of thing, but only if I know that there's more character-study type of content and then I scroll past the risque bits.

Here's an unpopular opinion though: RPF-shipping (at least the kind that's sandboxed) isn't all that different from shipping fictional characters. The versions of people we see are all actors to an extent. They (mostly) control what aspects of their personality are displayed and the topics they'll share their thoughts on, so it's almost like a character they're playing (not saying that they're inauthentic, though). Things like liveshows obviously blur the lines, but I think that dnp are practiced enough that they don't give away more than they want. I've only gotten into these two quite recently, so I'm less influenced by early dnp who seemed to be more open. Honestly, I'm not sure if I think this way to rationalize my own shipping? It's a tangled mess in my head. I also tend to only ship people who are more private; I'm never interested in shipping people who are very loud with who they are and what goes on in their lives, because then it really feels like an infringement. I...guess that's pretty hypothetical ._.
Sexuality thoughts
I think that both Dan and Phil don't like to be labeled, but if push comes to shove, their answer of bi from 2009 holds. I don't think either of them have claimed to be anything else? Dan was emphatic about not being gay years ago, but he never claimed to be straight AFAIK (also I agree with dizzy about his motives in 2012-2013). Dan is much louder about his attraction to guys, but he often does it in a joking way. Phil's mentions are rarer but tend to be more genuine--or at least not immediately prefaced or followed by a blatant 'yeah see what I did/said there'. I don't really read into this difference much, but it's interesting to note. Nothing either of them have said/done has made me think that they're lying about being non-straight for whatever purpose (more views, keeping mystery alive, other nefarious plots), so I think the queer-baiting argument doesn't really apply here. Their decision to not outright state their exact relationship has a ton of nuance behind it, most of which has been very eloquently said already.
Relationship thoughts
While it's certainly possible dnp is ace-spectrum, I don't see this as likely in the context of their history. I also think while it's entirely possible for two platonic friends to have a forever home, pets, kids, etc. together, IMO it's unlikely for this to be case for these two. As much as how the idea of marriage and what it stands for has evolved, it's generally still more preferable to having those things with a romantic partner. They're both quite young so they do still have plenty of time, and with the jobs and exposure they have, they meet a lot of people who they could be compatible with.

I think it says a lot that they're planning for a future with each other, given all the stuff I just said.

I don't think I've said this exact phrase here, but when I talk about dnp on tumblr, I tend to put my feelings about them as "I'm in love with their love". It just makes me really happy to see two people who love and support each other, platonically or romantically, in everything the other does so whole-heartedly. Their relationship is just so happy and warm
if my heart was a compass you'd be north
previously myllakka

User avatar
SquishPhan
mark of oxin
Posts: 2465
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 11:18 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by SquishPhan » Tue May 09, 2017 3:08 pm

auri wrote:Do you think Dan is gonna do a ls today or is it safe to assume he won't do it? I'm losing hope for live shows this week, blah.
Nope don't think we'll get a live show, since Dan said in his latest one that we won't be getting one.
onetruetrash wrote:Phil's sexuality

There's not much to say about Phil's sexuality. He said in around 2009/2010 that he was bisexual, but didn't really like to label himself. We know he's crushed on girls. The only relationship he has confirmed was with a girl when he was 14 and it wasn't serious and only lasted a week. The only other possible relationship was with charlieskies, who said on Twitter that they dated, but Charlie was known to joke about dating/having sex with other YouTubers, so that probably isn't true. Phil has described both men and women as sexy before and has never went back on his old comment about his sexuality, so there's really no reason it shouldn't apply to him now.

I spent way more time on this than I should've.
I'm not sure if Phil and Charlie ever dated, but I'm pretty sure that they were at least flirting with each other.

capybantsa
spork
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 4:30 am
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Japan

Re: Dan & Phil Part 45: R.I.P danisnotonfire 2009-2017

Post by capybantsa » Tue May 09, 2017 3:14 pm

bants before bedtime

Wow you guys are suddenly using a lot of words I had to look up and am not really sure I believe in. The west is an interesting place

Anyway I also think the ideal world is one where we don't have to say anything, but right now sadly if you say nothing you're not "unknown" to most people, you're "straight".

That doesn't mean they need a label though. Many of us call them bisexual, but they could come out without using that label, or any label. They could say something simple but unambiguous like "gender isn't a factor in my dating life". The label isn't really the important part.

I think Dan's evolution from "no homo" to "actually quite a lot of homo" these days is promising even if I am frustrated that he keeps it intentionally semi-ambiguous


*Can't sleep, unnecessary nerd mode that nobody asked for activate*
I'm actually really interested by the 2015 phandom survey results (looking forward to 2017 ones too). I don't know if it's a generational thing or if D&P just attract specific kind of people, but the respondents seem quite open minded about sexual orientation.

42.4% thought Phil was bi or pan, 50.1% thought the same of Dan. Fun math: If you only count the people who actually gave opinions (which was about 3/4), almost 80% thought Dan was bi/pan and almost 70% thought Phil was. Wowza.

Further, 12% initially assumed Dan was gay but only 1.9% continued to think it, 10.1% and 5.9% for Phil.

Comparing that to the shipping question, while over 80% shipped or partially shipped Phan, only 45.4% thought there was something actually sexual and/or romantic at some time between them. MORE people thought they liked men or both than thought they were in some kind of something.
I'm so used to the Kpop fandom where 90% of male/male shippers think both the guys are straight so this is actually really refreshing

Fwah


This had no purpose really

I just did it because I thought "I wonder how many of their shippers actually think something is between them" and "I wonder how many of THOSE people think they're gay/bi"

Now I wonder if D&P have seen the survey results and if so what they think of it

I should go to bed it's Wednesday now
papierklemmen wrote:
anime_is_not_cool wrote:Idb isn't a nice place during droughts :D)
lol phil literally uploaded a video YESTERDAY.
we need more

Locked