Dan & Phil Part 98: forever home!!1!!!

Our two favourite full time internet nerds who never go outside!
Locked
User avatar
plinthofmylife
janice from the shop
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:41 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: USA

I don't necessarily disagree with you but I'm not sure I completely agree either. Their business model is indeed clear but I also wouldn't classify IRL as strictly an e-commerce , (more an agency) considering their clients are the creators/artist and not the consumer - which is why you're right that the marketing is done by the creators. In that sense having few clients, who then might not have as big of a reach (i'm excluding dnp here) doesn't seem like a sustainable business model for a company that's been around more than 5 years.
Hmm, I feel like this is where we differ. I still see the customers as the client, and the creators as the marketers. I have always assumed that IRL takes in the majority of the profit, and creators get a small cut since I expected they don't put up the $$ for merch purchases, IRL does. So creators get a small cut, not the majority of the profit. I.e. I don't see them as shopify/an agency, I see them as an e-commerce bizness that caters to the creator niche as the marketing.

I.e. the customers that buy merch are the end user, and they are overwhelmingly repeat customers because of the creator branding (see: every dnp merch drop) so just like a publishing company or a label, the creators are doing the marketing and getting a cut of the profits but the actual product and customers are the consumers of merch

Maybe this is where I'm wrong.

Where is that Hank & John + Martyn + Phil "Bizness Bros" podcast!?!?
Image
User avatar
liola
rankussy
Posts: 1685
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy

plinthofmylife wrote: Wed Feb 03, 2021 8:24 pm
I don't necessarily disagree with you but I'm not sure I completely agree either. Their business model is indeed clear but I also wouldn't classify IRL as strictly an e-commerce , (more an agency) considering their clients are the creators/artist and not the consumer - which is why you're right that the marketing is done by the creators. In that sense having few clients, who then might not have as big of a reach (i'm excluding dnp here) doesn't seem like a sustainable business model for a company that's been around more than 5 years.
Hmm, I feel like this is where we differ. I still see the customers as the client, and the creators as the marketers. I have always assumed that IRL takes in the majority of the profit, and creators get a small cut since I expected they don't put up the $$ for merch purchases, IRL does. So creators get a small cut, not the majority of the profit. I.e. I don't see them as shopify/an agency, I see them as an e-commerce bizness that caters to the creator niche as the marketing.
I think this is definitely where we see it differently because to me identifying the client of a company means paying attention to who they're talking to and even from their website it seems obvious that it's targeted to creators, they want to appeal and "sell" their service to creators because ultimately those are the ones they consider as clients. I see it a little bit as an agency kind of situation, where you obviously want to make sure your client sells and sells well to keep the whole boat afloat - so obviously you do care about the pool of customers - but ultimately you want to market yourself to reach other clients?

The creators DO take care of the marketing but that's because they're selling their own brand, they're not selling IRL Digital, if that makes sense? IRL does marketing for itself by promoting to find new creators, not necessarily to sell the products (although it does end up doing that too, because ultimately it's a small company and want to get revenue) I don't know if I'm explaining it right haha

BUT I don't think there's a right or wrong view in this and either of us is 100% right or wrong like it's probably not as cut and dry as we're making it lol

Look idk but either they give the podcast to me or I might keep ranting and speculating over it !!
Will probably never be over the BONCAS and the beauty of Phil Lester.

Official Moving Hill Mayor
Levitating
eclipse shirt
Posts: 391
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:00 am

I agree with liola, based on what they promote on their own IRL website. They talk about their experience in selling tours and sold-out merch blabla.

Well, either way, I cannot wait for Dan to properly start publishing things! When is the book coming out?
User avatar
shan
morning quiff
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

18th of May
User avatar
dontpanic
eclipse shirt
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 5:25 am
Location: I've never seen the snow

Sorry for what'll inevitably be too long of a post, but I've just been thinking about something and I need to write it down to get it out of my head. I'm also super caffeinated and procrastinating work so here we go :ribena:

So there's a very popular US left-wing political podcast I regularly listen to, and one of the hosts (jon l*vett) is engaged to a prominent US journalist (r*nan f*rrow)... and lately I can't stop noticing similarities between their relationship and Deppy. They're both a mlm couple who's been together for almost a decade (they even started dating around the same time), and like Deppy this couple got together when they were both on the verge of being public figures but not like, famous yet. At the start they'd post low-key coupley pictures and flirt over twitter just like Deppy, but once becoming more well-known they deleted a lot of past social media posts and kept their relationship ambiguous. b/c of this, like deppy the media narrative assumed friendship, like how in a NYT profile on r*nan they were described as best friends who "appeared at political fetes" together (there was a Vice article in 2013 trying to out r*nan using his relationship to jon as part of it, but tbh that just reminds me of the way some youtubers used Deppy's close relationship as content gossip). Similar Deppy, for years jon and r*nan exclusively attended public events together, publicly threw each other birthday parties, lightheartedly interact on twitter occasionally in the same casual way D&P currently do, etc. but it was a glass closet-esque relationship. They confirmed their relationship in 2019 while r*nan was on his book tour, and since then they actually mention each other in interviews and stuff (previously jon would occasionally refer to r*nan as an unnamed 'golf buddy,' but now he actually uses his name).

ANYWAY recently r*nan mentioned in an interview that despite personally wanting to create something professionally together, jon's resistant because he feels quote: "for our relationship do we want that, to be out there professionally in the spotlight, what effect would that have on our relationship." To hear that outloud really explains how they navigate their relationship despite working in overlapping fields. A handful of times they've done a segment or interview on jon's less serious podcast or r*nan will talk off-camera while jon livestreams something (very dan-esque disembodied voice haha) but that's pretty much it. They even had r*nan collaborate with a smaller podcasting company to create a miniseries despite jon literally owning one of the largest podcasting companies out there. This is all despite how, like Dan and Phil, their dynamic when appearing together is always incredibly well received; considering their extensive connections in the entertainment industry they could 100% successfully capitalize off a collaboration--anything from doing a simple podcast to hosting an hbo docuseries they could easily get greenlit.

So, Jon and R*nan's approach to their professional/personal dynamic seems to be what Dan and Phil are retroactively aiming for. While Deppy own a company together and have an entire backlog of joint content, now that they're publicly out they seem to care more about preserving their personal romantic happiness rather than advancing a career as a duo... and let's be honest, more content together would easily generate more money and popularity than individual content at this point.

Seeing both couples choose their relationship over easy monetization, even if the risk to their relationship's small considering both seem to have solid foundations, is really interesting. It also suggests that if Dan and Phil make some significant joint content ever again it'll likely mean it's something they really believe in and find important to do together, which is a nice thought :)

Another note is the obvious one: they're both in same-sex relationships while being very career-focused. Being in a public same-sex relationship in the early to mid 2010s would have very likely stalled their career, whether in entertainment, politics, or journalism, and the urge to hide the personal for the career is something a lot of LGBTQ people face. And being out while publicly being in a same-sex relationship would be an even bigger liability (for lack of a better word). Even jon, who has always been out, has spoken about dissonance he faced writing speeches for an administration yet to support something as simple as anti-discrimination laws and same-sex marriage. Off-Topic:
if you're bored he did this talk like 5 years ago about this dissonance specifically in relation to same-sex marriage... and also how he performed the first same-sex marriage at the white house before it was even part of the democratic platform.
anywho, choosing the professional over being out is such a big thing to come to terms with, keeping a HUGE part of your life secret in fear of damaging your career, and I wonder (specifically for Phil) how difficult it was for him knowing in the beginning the stability of his career's contingent on keeping hidden a sexuality he's already comfortable with. Phil's always been great at keeping his public image very contained, especially in comparison to Dan, but I wonder how much of that was a learned necessity rather than something he's always been fine with. Like many LGBTQ ppl, it's interesting to consider their desire to keep the personal life private in order to protect professional potential. personal:
While not a public figure in the least unless you're a fan of niche economic journals, I'm a researcher trying to get a tenure-track position in a field unfortunately still overwhelmingly populated by white cis straight men. So while I can't hide my race, I plan on withhold info on my sexuality and relationship to gender until I'm in a more stable point in my career despite how almost all of my queer friends find it to be cowardly and like selling-out. anyway, it's relatable.
TLDR after all this rambling I guess it all boils down to the extra variables people in same-sex relationships have to consider when in the public eye compared to everyone else. It's like these two couples are case studies in how same-sex couples navigate fame: jon and r*nan were together ~8 years before confirming their relationship, and Dan and Phil have been together even longer... most cishet only wait a few months before publically dating, and that's if they're responsible... like, when jon and r*nan first started dating, jon's bff and coworker dated a number of celebrities, yet those relationships were publicly known because he never had to worry about any of the above-mentioned stuff.

This is all of course things LGBTQ ppl deal with regardless of job or whatever, and both couples have stacks on stacks of privileges most of us could only dream of, but it's just that there aren't too many examples of famous long term same-sex couples so I guess I found it interesting to note how similarly both couples navigated their relationship as public figures, even if both pairs are only famous in their respective industries (Deppy youtube and jon/r*nan US politics and news).

(also fun note: theres so many weird surface level similarities between this couple and Deppy: they're millennials, all huge nerds, play video games together/host game nights, did long distance for various lengths of time, and my favorite, met through twitter where one slid into the other's mentions with a thirst tweet. They even have the same age gap which is just such a weird detail :lol: ).

IDK what my point even was anymore... also oh no this is too long I'm sorry :snow:
User avatar
shan
morning quiff
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

dontpanic wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:33 am personal:
While not a public figure in the least unless you're a fan of niche economic journals, I'm a researcher trying to get a tenure-track position in a field unfortunately still overwhelmingly populated by white cis straight men. So while I can't hide my race, I plan on withhold info on my sexuality and relationship to gender until I'm in a more stable point in my career despite how almost all of my queer friends find it to be cowardly and like selling-out. anyway, it's relatable.
TLDR
Really interesting and very true. The decision not to sell out on their relationship gives me all kinds of warm fuzzy feelings. Their relationship is for them and while we know and they know we know and we know they know we know, they haven't sold that soundbite out to the media or continued on with the regular joint content we were used to that would have made them bank. It implies they think their actual relationship is more important than money and it's so lovely.

Also, re: personal bit, academia is notoriously shit for sexism, racism and homophobia. It's a hard enough field to get a good stable-ish job in so you do what you feel you need to get that tenure. The situation sucks and isn't right but all we can do is work towards making it a more accepting place. In the meantime don't miss out on these opportunities, we can do the best work at changing the culture from the inside! I'm a researcher as well and it's just one big boys club. Another female colleague of mine threw a quick talk on sexism into a lab meeting recently and it wasn't received very well by the worst offenders but all we can do is keep trying :shrug:
User avatar
glitterintheair
phillluminati
Posts: 823
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:56 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy
Contact:

While I do understand and respect dnp’s decision to do what they are comfortable with and what is best for their relationship, I feel like I don’t quite understand this whole patting them on the back because “they don’t sell out their relationship”, mostly because I don’t see what’s so bad about lgbt couples using their platforms to show us positive examples of same-sex relationships. Like, I understand dnp don’t want to do that, but I don’t know, I have always found a bit weird how the phandom demonize people who do make content out of their relationship as if it’s a bad thing when it can be important to other people.
I'm a winter flower underground, always thirsty for summer rain.
Templeofshame
rainbow nerd
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:46 pm
Pronouns: she/her

glitterintheair wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:02 am While I do understand and respect dnp’s decision to do what they are comfortable with and what is best for their relationship, I feel like I don’t quite understand this whole patting them on the back because “they don’t sell out their relationship”, mostly because I don’t see what’s so bad about lgbt couples using their platforms to show us positive examples of same-sex relationships. Like, I understand dnp don’t want to do that, but I don’t know, I have always found a bit weird how the phandom demonize people who do make content out of their relationship as if it’s a bad thing when it can be important to other people.
I agree. I think it's great that they set boundaries and make the decisions that are presumably best for them, but I think it's possible to be happy for and with them without ragging on other creators who have different boundaries and provide different perspectives and representation. People don't have to prioritize their relationship less or "sell out" to feature a relationship more directly and centrally in their content. (And I think it's a bit silly to pretend that a high percentage of us aren't here because of the ways they have, over time, monetized their relationship, if mostly subtextually.)
User avatar
glitterintheair
phillluminati
Posts: 823
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:56 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy
Contact:

Templeofshame wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:52 am (And I think it's a bit silly to pretend that a high percentage of us aren't here because of the ways they have, over time, monetized their relationship, if mostly subtextually.)
This. Like.. they HAVE monetized their relationship. They specifically gave priority to joint content for years because that’s what people loved the most. Now, if we think that they don’t monetize their relationship just because they don’t kiss on camera, okay, but that’s not the only way to monetize a relationship. And I wanna be clear, I am condemning in the slightest because that’s their job, but let’s not pretend that their relationship hasn’t been why a lot of people have stuck around for all these years.
I'm a winter flower underground, always thirsty for summer rain.
User avatar
shan
morning quiff
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

For me at least, it comes down to personality. I'm a private person and don't like fb etc. so I really like having an example of a couple who doesn't want to use every aspect of their lives to be broadcast for public consumption. I actually think in the field they work in, they're in the minority which is exactly why I appreciate it so much. It's less common these days to keep your relationship personal than it is to plaster it all over social media. There are other examples of positive LGBTQ+ relationships online already, they don't have to be another. Absolutely nothing against creators who do choose to do this.

Edit to add: they monetised their friendship and chemistry which I think is very different. They've backed off since coming out. Friendships and relationships are two very different beasts.
User avatar
glitterintheair
phillluminati
Posts: 823
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:56 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy
Contact:

Yeah they absolutely don’t have to be another of those couples, I just think you can appreciate dnp‘s decision to be private without throwing under the bus creators who do the opposite. Idk, I just don’t like the vibe of “dnp are better because they don’t do that”.
I'm a winter flower underground, always thirsty for summer rain.
User avatar
shan
morning quiff
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

Sorry if I gave off those vibes, they were definitely unintentional. I follow quite a few couples on YouTube and don't think there's anything wrong with using a relationship to drive the direction of content. Just that I find a level of unity in not sharing personal details that makes me really happy. I guess it doesn't come across that way when I talk about it though!
Secretstanner
truth bomb
Posts: 348
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:42 am

Here’s my take. I don’t like relationship channels or family channels. I think monetising real life romantic relationships and families to me aren’t a good thing for people. There have been so many couples who have later broken up saying they would play up the happiness and “loveliness” when the camera turns on, they could be in a fight and but they had to pretend they weren’t. I think when YouTubers first introduced a partner they see the views go up and then they don’t purposely fake emotions or touchy-feely ness. But it happens subconsciously, you see in the comments people commenting how cute it is when you kiss on screen, when you look at each other etc. Views and money go up people love watching people in love. Some couple have continued to play couples on screen months after breaking up.

I’m not going to pretend that I don’t like dnp and dnp being in a relationship. But I’ve never asked for anything more than we get. Sure I would love for them not have HAVE to hold back natural reactions. But I don’t want on screen kisses. (Not gonna lie though dnp if you wanna drop a cheeky cheek kiss pic I won’t be mad jk) it’s just not my thing. I wouldn’t want a boyfriend tag or chapstick challenge etc because if they ever fully came out as a couple that’s what people want. Is there anything wrong with that? No of course not because other youtubers have been selling that to us for years. It’s what we expect. And some people on here might say they don’t want that. Which I’m one of them. But we are a few in thousands. People will want and want and want. They have said it’s dangerous to let people know everything about you. I personally believe it’s not healthy. And dnp have done a very good job at letting us know what THEY want. We know if and when. Plus they have done a good job at making us THINK we know everything.

Everyone right now think about how emotional invested we are in them as a couple. I know I am very invested in them. I look at them as having a healthy work life view??? Lol I dunno how to put it. From the start they set boundaries and how they wanted to be and what they wanted to share. Yes the personas have broken down a big amount over the years. I saw a tweet that said “ phannies will fight people on the relationship status of dnp trying to convince them theyre together and then turn around and live in constant fear that one of them will say they're single ? explain that” I’ve never read anything more truer than that.

I see some of the younger kids do get anxious. I’ll see “I just get the feeling they broke up” “Phil said his washing machine I think Dan moved out” were in some sort of constant paranoia where we can’t just let it be. I don’t think dnp ever showing the side what other couples do on camera would be healthy for us too.

Also I never got the vibe that anyone was judging other couples. And if you do judge them... that’s you’re opinion because there’s definitely been couples that I’ve side eyes a few times. I just got home from work and I’m tired. There’s more I could write but I love sleep more.
User avatar
glitterintheair
phillluminati
Posts: 823
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:56 am
Pronouns: she/her
Location: Italy
Contact:

shan wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 6:47 am Sorry if I gave off those vibes, they were definitely unintentional. I follow quite a few couples on YouTube and don't think there's anything wrong with using a relationship to drive the direction of content. Just that I find a level of unity in not sharing personal details that makes me really happy. I guess it doesn't come across that way when I talk about it though!
Oh I wasn’t referring to you specifically, sorry if it felt like an attack! It was more of a general thought because I saw a lot of people being like “yeah stan dnp because they aren’t like other YouTubers who use their relationship for money” and it rubs me the wrong way.. maybe because I would have loved having good lgbt couples representation growing up and I think that especially new generations might find comfort in that.
I'm a winter flower underground, always thirsty for summer rain.
User avatar
LAshleigh
hobbit hair
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 9:17 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: USA

On the one hand, I love LGBTQ+ couples who happen to both be youtubers and/or sometimes make joint content, such as Jamie and Shaaba or Jessica and Claudia. On the other hand, I don't think that those YouTubers have the cult following that dnp do, particularly with the focus on their relationship, so I understand why it may not be healthy for dnp to behave similarly. Ultimately, it is clear that all three of those couples have discussed their boundaries (Jamie and Shaaba don't kiss on camera, etc.) and I am more than happy to support all three of them as they prioritize their relationships first and youtube career second, in whatever form that is for them.
User avatar
alittledizzy
actual demon phannie
actual demon phannie
Posts: 7106
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 3:09 pm
Pronouns: she/her

LAshleigh wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 2:46 pm On the one hand, I love LGBTQ+ couples who happen to both be youtubers and/or sometimes make joint content, such as Jamie and Shaaba or Jessica and Claudia. On the other hand, I don't think that those YouTubers have the cult following that dnp do, particularly with the focus on their relationship, so I understand why it may not be healthy for dnp to behave similarly. Ultimately, it is clear that all three of those couples have discussed their boundaries (Jamie and Shaaba don't kiss on camera, etc.) and I am more than happy to support all three of them as they prioritize their relationships first and youtube career second, in whatever form that is for them.
I think the boundaries being discussed and laid out make a difference. I also think another big difference is meeting before youtube, or after? I don't know enough about Jamie and Shaaba, but Jessica and Claudia, just for example, didn't essentially 'get together' on camera. Having a foundation that isn't also tangled up in your career probably makes it feel a little less tumultuous.

At the end of the day I think deciding you want to be representation in a specific way (for a gay relationship specifically to an audience you know you already have a lot of influence over) is probably very daunting and when I say I'm proud of them I mean for making the decision that's best for themselves in spite of the money. I think it's very obvious that other couples (like Jessica and Claudia, or Rose and Rosie) are comfortable with the attention on the relationship and therefore it wouldn't be that complicated. of a choice for them. Dan (and Phil) had that long history of the public speculating on their relationship, speculating on their sexualities, while not being out to some people, while dealing with traumatic family health issues, while dealing with untreated depression then trying to stabilize that... all already in the public view. I mean, everyone has their shit, obviously, I am just saying that to say I'm always in my head understanding and empathizing with Dan and Phil specifically and just being happy that right now they seem so happy and that's why I support their boundaries. This is tl;dr for what other people said; I'm not looking down on anyone that does find it easy, just glad Dan and Phil found a good line for themselves.
User avatar
LAshleigh
hobbit hair
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 9:17 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: USA

alittledizzy wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 3:01 pm I think the boundaries being discussed and laid out make a difference. I also think another big difference is meeting before youtube, or after? I don't know enough about Jamie and Shaaba, but Jessica and Claudia, just for example, didn't essentially 'get together' on camera. Having a foundation that isn't also tangled up in your career probably makes it feel a little less tumultuous.
Yes, I was just coming back to add this as well! Personally, I came out when I started dating my fiancée, and it was WAY easier to tell and be ourselves with people who we met later and knew us as nothing other than partners. People who we had known for years (and had been speculating, analyzing, etc.) already had opinions and judgements and warnings and it was all sorts of messy, even for two nobodies without any hint of a public following. I can only imagine how that would be amplified for someone like dnp
Megancita75
ar·tic·u·late
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 6:43 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: USA

I watch Rose and Rosie, as well as Jessie and Claude, and while I love how much of their personal relationship they share I often find myself yelling at the screen when they show a lot of their houses or neighborhoods. I also get the impression that they aren't sharing every last single thing. So I think it just comes down to factors like personal past experiences with fans, personal tolerance for publicly sharing certain information, and just a general calibration about the potential risks and benefits -- like, there's one future where it's great and there are no negative consequences to being more open, and then there's another future where there are consequences, and I think DnP and maybe Ronan and Jon are erring on the side of "we can't say for sure that being less private would result in any issues, but it might, and therefore we will err on the side for now of not inviting in that might."

And like Phil said -- the more I think about it, the more I love it -- we are lucky that there are plenty of other ice cream shops out there that have scoops with different flavors where we can go to satisfy that craving.
User avatar
shan
morning quiff
Posts: 455
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:00 am

Megancita75 wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 3:09 pm And like Phil said -- the more I think about it, the more I love it -- we are lucky that there are plenty of other ice cream shops out there that have scoops with different flavors where we can go to satisfy that craving.
Phil really is out there making the perfect analogies, I didn't appreciate it enough in the video but it's so true when you expand it like that!
User avatar
inanerat
eclipse shirt
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:27 am
Pronouns: he/she/they

I don't think anyone's talked about this yet so I'm just gonna come at this from a bit of a sadder angle for a moment (soz). Of course, we don't really know which/how much any of these factors play into dnp's decisions, but we can consider them.

Thinking about dnp being more open about/ explicitly stating confirmation of their romantic relationship online has a lot of weight to it, considering their history. They went through some shit. Traumatic shit.

While Phil hasn't really talked about it, so it's harder to gauge how much it really affected him, although I suspect it did, Dan says these things in BIG:
... and what me and Phil had was ours and personal and yet some people were trying to get access to it for their own satisfaction. It was no longer a few people on the internet, no big deal. So I just shut down. It felt like I was back at school again, surrounded by threatening people trying to expose me for their entertainment. ... But this experience seriously triggered some PTSD in me and I was back in the dark place.
(text stolen from transcript by goldenpinof on tumblr)

As much as the internet's general understanding of boundaries, as well as the fandom's and dnp's maturity and experience in how they would approach things (setting more explicit boundaries, etc.) I think it's important to consider how this traumatic history may very well play into their decisions today.

One thing I still think about a lot is how I was kind of taken aback in the Attitude article when Dan talks about how recently before BIG he had really been coming to terms with things, at least labels and identities like 'gay'. From the article:
In June last year — Pride month, appropriately — Dan posted a video entitled Basically, I’m Gay, in which he confronted his sexuality for the first time, both personally and publicly.
“I knew I was obviously not straight my whole life… [but] it was for the first time acknowledging this truth about myself and, in working out what my own story was, I had to confront all of these aspects of my life that I just hadn’t dealt with before,” he begins.
“I was sat quietly by myself thinking, OK, I want to talk about this publicly, I want to get this out of the way, I don’t want a skeleton in my closet… I just said out loud to myself: ‘I’m gay.’ It was really profound, [because] I’d been running away from that two-word admission my entire life.
(shout out to Dizzy for getting the article and posting the whole text to IDB, a true legend)

I remember being quite surprised at the realization that so much of that stuff was still as fresh as it was for Dan, and also how that shows how far he's come in terms of comfort with things in the time since BIG. For me, I guess I had assumed that things had been more solid for him for a while, after all he comes off quite polished and fairly confident in BIG. I guess the point of this is, that this moment was a good reminder to me that dnp themselves are still working through things, and we don't (nor should we imo, unless they want to share) have a great idea of what they are working/have worked through and when.

TLDR: dnp have been through some really traumatic stuff when it comes to their (romantic/sexual) relationship being online. It's hard for us to know where they are with holding that trauma now, but I think it's an important aspect of their history to keep in mind when thinking about them and what they choose/want/feel comfortable sharing of their relationship (beyond friendship) now and into the future.

Ok thanks for reading that literal essay lmao. I do wonder if things like this will be touched on in YWGTTN or not, I guess we'll see in a few months. It is something I would love to hear Dan talk about/ hear his reflections on now, but I would totally understand if it's not something he ever does. I would also love to hear his thoughts and experiences on loving, resentment and forgiveness with something like a fanbase, which is so amorphous and made up of many different individuals, and can be a community that both lifts you up and can hurt you deeply. But again, I'm not sure he would ever want to talk about that kind of stuff online. That's why therapy exists.

Don't forget to be compassionate to yourself today <3 <3 :rainbow:
:transheart: :transheart: :transheart:
User avatar
rizzo
unduly facetious
unduly facetious
Posts: 1792
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:18 am

inanerat, I love your post and don't have much to add, because I agree with it entirely. Especially for Dan who had come out to his own family so recently... there's a lot of New Things happening all at once. It sounds so much more basic than what it is, but it really is understandable that they would want to slow down and maybe break up the sheer amount of overwhelming ~reveals~ that they're only just navigating for themselves, let alone in front of an audience.

That said, reading your post made me think: Surely... surely, they do couples therapy? Like, just given how much they've been through that's so unique and tough for them as a pair - they've got to, right?

Hm.
Levitating
eclipse shirt
Posts: 391
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:00 am



Just found this via danrifics on Tumblr! Hilarious
Last edited by alittledizzy on Thu Feb 04, 2021 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: fixed yt tag
User avatar
inanerat
eclipse shirt
Posts: 380
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 12:27 am
Pronouns: he/she/they

Ok I know I just made a post like last week talking about my dream for Phil to do a nail art video, BUT I have another vid idea.

:sparkle: :sparkle: Today's future AP content manifestation is: :sparkle: :sparkle:
a furniture building/assembling video.

I mean maybe they're gonna hire someone to put together all of the new furniture they are assumedly getting as part of the house/move. But if they are going to do some of it themselves I would love a modern version of THE WARDROBE, doesn't have to be a wardrobe, just like a shelf or whatever. And honestly, Phil could do it by himself and I'd still be delighted, but having Dan would be a helpful bonus. I just want to watch gays struggle to assemble furniture. It's my favourite video genre.

Really I just want to be entertained and horrified by (Dan and) Phil trying to build something. Watching them flail at something I love and am good at is just good fun (I work in a machine shop, I build/assemble fairly intricate parts based on diagrams regularly as part of my job). Plus I think it would generally make entertaining content and who knows, maybe it would be a specific enough theme to have a bonus ad baby (phil's term).

Just saying. I think it would be a pretty good idea on both practical and my self-indulgent wishes terms. :waiting:
:transheart: :transheart: :transheart:
User avatar
lefthandedism
simply stressed bisexual
simply stressed bisexual
Posts: 1672
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2016 10:16 pm
Pronouns: she/her
Location: New England

inanerat wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:08 pm
:sparkle: :sparkle: Today's future AP content manifestation is: :sparkle: :sparkle:
a furniture building/assembling video.
You mean like this one? :tu:

"If you're left-handed, ask a friend."
"Why am I left-handed?"
"Everybody makes mistakes."
oriharakaoru
crusty sponge
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 3:49 am
Pronouns: she/her

dontpanic wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:33 am So there's a very popular US left-wing political podcast I regularly listen to, and one of the hosts (jon l*vett) is engaged to a prominent US journalist (r*nan f*rrow)...
hello, fellow rolo + dnp stan. :ribena:
Locked

Return to “Daniel Howell & Phil Lester”