Dan & Phil Part 47: Do it with Dan!

[blackdenim]

With regards to them censoring the boyfriend question, it seems to me that there's a grand tradition (not amongst D&P specifically just.. in the world I guess) of double standards when it comes to censorship of female sexuality compared to male sexuality. For some reason a woman 'finishing her process' is often discussed in more coded terms than when we talk about guys getting off.

I don't know if it's because it seems more delicate/intimate to talk about that side of sex, or because it's not a part of sex we often see depicted/talk about in mainstream media, or because women aren't meant to crave sex/orgasms the same way men do, but I think two guys struggling to talk about making a woman come without giggling is completely ordinary/to be expected, whether they're gay, straight, bi, pan, had sex with a woman that morning or haven't seen one naked since 2009! On TV, in many books, films, etc. there is the same kind of attitude/double standard to discussing sex. And I think it's interesting that D&P have internalised that - I assume unintentionally. E.g. they had no problem making jokes about the girl deepthroating a spring onion in My Horse Prince, and making fairly explicit jokes throughout that series based on male sexuality. I'm sure there are other examples but that's the one that springs to mind.

Sorry for the ramble I am severely jetlagged.

[sugar]

i find the comments on their dynamic and personalities interesting, so i thought i'd add my take.

re: swearing/vulgarities, i can completely relate to phil's desire to have a clean image online. it reminds me a lot of myself. with close friends, sure, i can be obscene (especially if the friend is that way themselves.) i understand feeling like it's ingenuine or holding him back, but i think it's probably pretty natural to him once the camera's rolling, like i can censor myself in front of grandma. around mixed company i always find it best to lean on the cautious side, and i feel that's all he's doing. i don't think it seems unnatural at all. i feel it's just his preference in how to confidently present himself.

i've never thought about it this way and i wish i had because it makes so much sense. i guess i never thought about how i so easily transition between groups of people and subconciously determine what are appropriate and inappropriate topics/terms based on who's there. i actually make youtube videos as well and i think i've only sworn once on my channel (and i remember it vividly for some reason, probably because of this fact) despite having a pretty foul mouth when i'm with my friends. i guess i never thought about this in relation to them and the way they censor themselves while filming and how natural it probably really is.

(9:47 It looks like Dan starts looking for a lighter to his right, but it could be a coincidence.)

i immediately thought the same thing on my first watch.

doubt they smoke cigarettes but tbh wouldn't be surprised if dan and phil smoke weed. i'm not sure how it is in the uk because even though i lived in london for 4 months i don't think i quote got the average experience.
however, i do wonder if it's anything like it is where i live which is: almost everyone smokes weed to some degree. sure, there are the people that do and can't stop talking about it ever and the people that just don't but aside from them almost everyone i know smokes regularly or still occasionally, even my parents. and i don't just mean the circle i hang out with. really almost everyone i've known since graduating highschool. they certainly have the money and it's not as if they get drug tested for their jobs. i've definitely wondered, never had any reason to speculate specifically that they do, though. but the white lighter thing sparked my interest again. for some reason i feel like most people who had never used a lighter would have not known that a white lighter is bad luck and they totally didn't question that in the video. and i did look to me as if dan started looking on the desk near them. but maybe it was just a coincidence.

With regards to them censoring the boyfriend question, it seems to me that there's a grand tradition (not amongst D&P specifically just.. in the world I guess) of double standards when it comes to censorship of female sexuality compared to male sexuality. For some reason a woman 'finishing her process' is often discussed in more coded terms than when we talk about guys getting off.

I don't know if it's because it seems more delicate/intimate to talk about that side of sex, or because it's not a part of sex we often see depicted/talk about in mainstream media, or because women aren't meant to crave sex/orgasms the same way men do, but I think two guys struggling to talk about making a woman come without giggling is completely ordinary/to be expected, whether they're gay, straight, bi, pan, had sex with a woman that morning or haven't seen one naked since 2009! On TV, in many books, films, etc. there is the same kind of attitude/double standard to discussing sex. And I think it's interesting that D&P have internalised that - I assume unintentionally. E.g. they had no problem making jokes about the girl deepthroating a spring onion in My Horse Prince, and making fairly explicit jokes throughout that series based on male sexuality. I'm sure there are other examples but that's the one that springs to mind.

Sorry for the ramble I am severely jetlagged.

really interesting, and i think that you are probably right on there being more censorship on female sexuality. however, i don't think anything about the censored bit specifically alluded to a female. in fact, it didn't at all. just that a boyfriend couldn't "get them off" as the other option sayd.based on dan's liveshows i feel like i might've expected him to make a more generic/all-encompassing comment than a man specifically pleasuring a "lady". also since i personally believe he's been in a relationship with a man for the past 8ish years it seems odd all around. i have more thoughts on this but i'm not sure if they're considered appropriate for this forum so i'll put them under a spoiler:

at first, i thought of the fact that maybe it's often considered more difficult to get a woman off than a man, just based on my experiences as a person that for most intents and purposes identifies as a woman. but then if i get past my initial thoughts i know that equating being a woman to having a vagina is totally wrong. and, as i said, based on dan's liveshows i'd expect him to know that and try not to conform to that view.

i know it was probably an effort to prolong the censorship of the particular answer but the more i think about it the more i wonder why he immediately specifically equated it to a man and a woman.
i'm probably thinking too much about it.

[blackdenim]

awsugar: To clarify, by censorship I meant the awkward way they were talking about it ('censoring themselves', I suppose) rather than the physical blurring of words on the screen because that was obviously because they thought the phrase would get them flagged/was too vulgar for the gaming channel.

Also I do agree completely about women supposedly finding it harder to get off and I think that is definitely an element of it in wider society not just with the boys!

[Elemancy]

(9:47 It looks like Dan starts looking for a lighter to his right, but it could be a coincidence.)

i immediately thought the same thing on my first watch.

doubt they smoke cigarettes but tbh wouldn't be surprised if dan and phil smoke weed. i'm not sure how it is in the uk because even though i lived in london for 4 months i don't think i quote got the average experience.
however, i do wonder if it's anything like it is where i live which is: almost everyone smokes weed to some degree. sure, there are the people that do and can't stop talking about it ever and the people that just don't but aside from them almost everyone i know smokes regularly or still occasionally, even my parents. and i don't just mean the circle i hang out with. really almost everyone i've known since graduating highschool. they certainly have the money and it's not as if they get drug tested for their jobs. i've definitely wondered, never had any reason to speculate specifically that they do, though. but the white lighter thing sparked my interest again. for some reason i feel like most people who had never used a lighter would have not known that a white lighter is bad luck and they totally didn't question that in the video. and i did look to me as if dan started looking on the desk near them. but maybe it was just a coincidence.

Oh. This never occurred to me. When he said lighter I thought he meant those lighters specifically made to light grill fires or candles safely, the ones with the long barrel and ignition switches? and since they have such a track record of buying scented candles I immediately thought of that instead and didn't pay it any more mind than that.

[sugar]

awsugar: To clarify, by censorship I meant the awkward way they were talking about it ('censoring themselves', I suppose) rather than the physical blurring of words on the screen because that was obviously because they thought the phrase would get them flagged/was too vulgar for the gaming channel.

Also I do agree completely about women supposedly finding it harder to get off and I think that is definitely an element of it in wider society not just with the boys!

i'm very tired but i think i knew that and had it in mine with my answer? i think i was more commenting on them directly equating that/the one that they didn't censor which meant the same thing to specifically being about a man and a woman when they 'censored' the way that they spoke about it. if that makes any sense at all.

(9:47 It looks like Dan starts looking for a lighter to his right, but it could be a coincidence.)

i immediately thought the same thing on my first watch.

doubt they smoke cigarettes but tbh wouldn't be surprised if dan and phil smoke weed. i'm not sure how it is in the uk because even though i lived in london for 4 months i don't think i quote got the average experience.
however, i do wonder if it's anything like it is where i live which is: almost everyone smokes weed to some degree. sure, there are the people that do and can't stop talking about it ever and the people that just don't but aside from them almost everyone i know smokes regularly or still occasionally, even my parents. and i don't just mean the circle i hang out with. really almost everyone i've known since graduating highschool. they certainly have the money and it's not as if they get drug tested for their jobs. i've definitely wondered, never had any reason to speculate specifically that they do, though. but the white lighter thing sparked my interest again. for some reason i feel like most people who had never used a lighter would have not known that a white lighter is bad luck and they totally didn't question that in the video. and i did look to me as if dan started looking on the desk near them. but maybe it was just a coincidence.

Oh. This never occurred to me. When he said lighter I thought he meant those lighters specifically made to light grill fires or candles safely, the ones with the long barrel and ignition switches? and since they have such a track record of buying scented candles I immediately thought of that instead and didn't pay it any more mind than that.

that could be true! i've just personally never heard the bad luck thing equated to that kind of lighters, only 'personal' lighters. especially since what i believe is the origin of that myth is basically based on the kind of lighters one would keep in their pocket. who really knows what their interaction with that myth is though, i suppose.

[Blue Girl]

Was already typing my reply about the candles and lighter, but Gnosia beat me to it, so I will just say: same, that's what I was thinking as well.

Really enjoyed the new video and the bants here! Loved llion's comment, well said:

i find the comments on their dynamic and personalities interesting, so i thought i'd add my take.

re: edgy!dan, i was one of the kids that liked him bc of the edge. as i've grown with him i now like him more for his more intellectual edge, as he is a sharp boy. i don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that this is why i used to like him, or that some people still like him for that. at this point there's only a true edge because of phil, compared to other youtubers. as already mentioned, the contrast in personality, is a lot of the draw to their content. "dan's the pen and phil's the highlighter that makes him brighter" and all that. cheesily put, but a fair assessment in their dynamic and how they like to come across. (basically i think dan's edginess is virtually nonexistent anymore, and only apparent compared to phil)

which brings me to re: phil's intentions, i don't think his cheery persona makes him seem manipulative or misleading. i think he likes to be the light in someone's day. he tries to keep things as fluffy and cheery as possible for maximum "be happy!!!!" vibes. it doesn't typically feel forced to me, more purposeful. it doesn't make me like him or his content any less, and almost more for how much thought he seems to put into this. dan does this too, in his own way, but phil's formula seems much more carefully calculated to me. anyway i don't think it's ingenuine, just him trying to make his mark on the world what he wants it to be. i actually admire that.

OK, I hate to be the one idiot that doesn't know this but what exactly does "tickle my bum" refer to? I thought I knew but then from the comments, I'm starting to think it doesn't mean what I thought it meant. I am dumb, please help.

[llion]

Really enjoyed the new video and the bants here! Loved llion's comment, well said:

i find the comments on their dynamic and personalities interesting, so i thought i'd add my take.

re: edgy!dan, i was one of the kids that liked him bc of the edge. as i've grown with him i now like him more for his more intellectual edge, as he is a sharp boy. i don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that this is why i used to like him, or that some people still like him for that. at this point there's only a true edge because of phil, compared to other youtubers. as already mentioned, the contrast in personality, is a lot of the draw to their content. "dan's the pen and phil's the highlighter that makes him brighter" and all that. cheesily put, but a fair assessment in their dynamic and how they like to come across. (basically i think dan's edginess is virtually nonexistent anymore, and only apparent compared to phil)

which brings me to re: phil's intentions, i don't think his cheery persona makes him seem manipulative or misleading. i think he likes to be the light in someone's day. he tries to keep things as fluffy and cheery as possible for maximum "be happy!!!!" vibes. it doesn't typically feel forced to me, more purposeful. it doesn't make me like him or his content any less, and almost more for how much thought he seems to put into this. dan does this too, in his own way, but phil's formula seems much more carefully calculated to me. anyway i don't think it's ingenuine, just him trying to make his mark on the world what he wants it to be. i actually admire that.

OK, I hate to be the one idiot that doesn't know this but what exactly does "tickle my bum" refer to? I thought I knew but then from the comments, I'm starting to think it doesn't mean what I thought it meant. I am dumb, please help.

aw thank you!

second idiot inquiring? i also thought i had an idea but i'm really not certain, yikes. (thanks for being the first to ask Blue Girl)

[lishachi]

I have spent my birthday morning googling what 'tickle my bum' means

I couldn't find a straight answer. Only some people saying that it literally means what it says it means. So??? I don't know. I will delete my history now though.

Regarding Dan and Phil's personalities - when I first watched Dan was definitely the face-palm, existential edge lord with a passion for procrastination. Which I related to a bit. (A lot, I was 17/18 at the time) He honestly sparked my interest in wearing black and fashion in general though, and now I haven't looked back, I embraced the fact that I like darker clothes. With Phil, he was immediately the 'sunshine' and people would comment this everywhere back when I found them. He was weird and nerdy which I also related to. He helped me realise that was OK.

Now I'm 20 (Oh dear god somebody help me) I've realised that these things I've learnt from them are part of my personality, but I've gotten older and hopefully wiser too, as have they. And you can definitely tell, Phil seemed a bit more 'grown up' in this video which is really nice to see, because in reality a lot of us here are just 20-something/30-something/40-something adults who are figuring shit out still and looking for happiness and laughs and bonding over these two fellow adults. So it is nice to see and hear them acting and speaking like adults. Makes it much more #relatable.

Did that make sense? Probably not. Anyway, hope you all have a good day, was very interesting to read everyones thoughts as always.

[capybantsa]

I wonder if the conspiracy theory talk was a dig at a certain someone or if Dan is secretly into that kind of stuff himself and is being tsundere

[idkwhattowrite]

I don't know how to quote older posts, but I had a thought about the layout of their flat that I thought I'd mention. Did they not say that the layout of the flat is even more confusing than their old one? To me that implies that it's not just a standard two floor flat (because they've only discussed two floors right?). So maybe the entrance to their flat is above the lounge area or something like that? I am pretty sure they said the lounge is upstairs, so I'm not sure how that works in terms of seeing trees outside, but it does look like it's the top of the trees at least.

I guess they could also have separate entrances to storage areas, but I have never heard of those being higher up than the floors of the living space. Then again, I have no clue about the housing market :p

[dontpanic]

re: phil's intentions, i don't think his cheery persona makes him seem manipulative or misleading. i think he likes to be the light in someone's day. he tries to keep things as fluffy and cheery as possible for maximum "be happy!!!!" vibes. it doesn't typically feel forced to me, more purposeful. it doesn't make me like him or his content any less, and almost more for how much thought he seems to put into this. dan does this too, in his own way, but phil's formula seems much more carefully calculated to me. anyway i don't think it's ingenuine, just him trying to make his mark on the world what he wants it to be. i actually admire that.

YES I so agree!

Both Phil and Dan are very talented at separating their real lives from what they present online, we know very little 'facts' about either of them. The way Dan and Phil differ in this sense, though, is how they present their emotions, feelings, all that mushy stuff. Phil is perfectly happy preserving an emotional distance with his audience and he doesn't pretend otherwise (animal gifs are almost as good...I guess). Dan is extremely open with his emotions, becoming even more so as time goes on (I was in a state of shock when he uttered the words "mental health issues").

But I will say, that another funny thing is that Phil acts more immature than Dan does, but it's not hard to see that Dan still wants to sound intelligent, cares what people thing, and okay this is offensives, but he has that irrational sense of maddening superiority and acts as If he's better than EVERYONE around him, including Phil "even Phil can do that" "If Phil can do it then u can do it" and u can argue that it's a joke, but it's obvious that he thinks himself a step much higher than the majority of the population.

When has dan ever said something about Phil like that? Not trying to be rude, I just honestly can't think of a time Dan's said anything even close to that.

(imo Dan rarely talks down about people, especially compared to those youtubers who are always on about how there's so much "stupid in the world")

What does Dan want out of making videos? What is his goal towards us as an audience? Who the hell knows. Dan certainly doesn't.

That's the PERFECT way to describe Dan's online presence.

Hmm this reminds me of a quote I heard once (okay bear with me here) "we fall in love with the catcher in the rye at age 15 because we all want to be Holden Caulfield, but fall out of love with it as we get older because we all want to be Atticus Finch now"

Gods I really hope one of the most has read To Kill a Mockingbird.... or Catcher in the Rye (the funny thing is with an English degree Phils probably read classics? Idk how an English major works- I just like reading lol)

That's a cool quote, I don't think I've ever heard it before!

I'd guess my bottom dollar they've both read those books. most schools force you to read them when you're a teen, they're not really university level reading. Although the UK might not be as obsessed with them since both books are american.

[lishachi]

[offtopic]Does anyone know if their old apartment is being listed? I'm genuinely curious, to see it in general and because I've wanted to live in London for a while even though it's a dream that's probably going to take me a while (lol) I wanted to know also because that size apartment is really nice and I'd like to know the price for that kind of apartment. It'll probably crush my dreams, but I'm curious.
I understand that these kind of things aren't good to post publicly so if anyone knows and can PM me that would be cool![/offtopic]

[saffarinda]

It's the first thing you see in almost anything they send to the wide public. They introduce themseleves, Phil says something slightly socially unacceptable/filled with innuendos, Dan is silent staring at Phil, before he repeats his phrase in a high-pitched tone, Phil describes it, Dan reacts with incredulity before they continue and finish the video.

Yes! Wonderful insights on their personas. That particular dynamic you mentioned above though is what my husband loves about them. He's mentioned/described it many times. It works, whether it is 100% genuine or not.

I also agree with you on the age/censoring issue. There are several folks on here whose kids, younger siblings or nieces and nephews watch with them, myself included. I pre-watch for content for my almost eight year old and have not shared any of the Google or games of this type with him.

I'd just been watching loads of random videos they made for places they were going on tour, and the video they made for BBC Breakfast and they just follow the exact same structure tbh.

I don't think they should be forced to censor themselves, but it's useful. They know their demographic and they know who the videos are going out to. Besides, censoring provided them with the opportunity to make jokes related to it - I don't see a problem with it.

Re. Lighter: I saw Dan's movement but I can't see why it would be towards a lighter. I thought he was either going to search up what it meant in a laptop out of sight, or was just doing that annoying thing he occasionally does where he looks at himself off camera (he did it so much in the old Can Your Pet video it grated me so much). Having a question about a lighter wouldn't make him automatically search one out if he owns one for the purpose of smoking anything (unless it's a lighter for his candles )

[lishachi]

[offtopic]Does anyone know if their old apartment is being listed? I'm genuinely curious, to see it in general and because I've wanted to live in London for a while even though it's a dream that's probably going to take me a while (lol) I wanted to know also because that size apartment is really nice and I'd like to know the price for that kind of apartment. It'll probably crush my dreams, but I'm curious.
I understand that these kind of things aren't good to post publicly so if anyone knows and can PM me that would be cool![/offtopic]

Thanks for the messages guys! Very grateful.

It's the first thing you see in almost anything they send to the wide public. They introduce themseleves, Phil says something slightly socially unacceptable/filled with innuendos, Dan is silent staring at Phil, before he repeats his phrase in a high-pitched tone, Phil describes it, Dan reacts with incredulity before they continue and finish the video.

Yes! Wonderful insights on their personas. That particular dynamic you mentioned above though is what my husband loves about them. He's mentioned/described it many times. It works, whether it is 100% genuine or not.

I also agree with you on the age/censoring issue. There are several folks on here whose kids, younger siblings or nieces and nephews watch with them, myself included. I pre-watch for content for my almost eight year old and have not shared any of the Google or games of this type with him.

I'd just been watching loads of random videos they made for places they were going on tour, and the video they made for BBC Breakfast and they just follow the exact same structure tbh.

I don't think they should be forced to censor themselves, but it's useful. They know their demographic and they know who the videos are going out to. Besides, censoring provided them with the opportunity to make jokes related to it - I don't see a problem with it.

Re. Lighter: I saw Dan's movement but I can't see why it would be towards a lighter. I thought he was either going to search up what it meant in a laptop out of sight, or was just doing that annoying thing he occasionally does where he looks at himself off camera (he did it so much in the old Can Your Pet video it grated me so much). Having a question about a lighter wouldn't make him automatically search one out if he owns one for the purpose of smoking anything (unless it's a lighter for his candles )

They used to have candles sat on the printer in their old apartment, don't remember what vid it was but it was a gaming vid and they had a candle in their office room. Maybe they have a lighter there for candles? They've commented before about smoking and that they dislike it, so I doubt there's any chance of them smoking. Either way it's their decision, but if there was a lighter near him I'm going to take a guess and think that it's for the candles as Phil is a candle hoarder. (No judgement, I am too.)

[captainspacecoat]

Re: lighter - My immediate thought was that he was searching for a lighter too, but then I thought about it and realised it wouldn't really make sense for them to keep a lighter in the gaming room so he probably wasn't. I think it's likely that they do own lighters though - they've both said they don't smoke cigarettes (and I believe them) but many people have them for lighting candles/stoves etc, and I also wouldn't be surprised if they do smoke weed sometimes as it's pretty common (at least it is where I'm from, and I assume London's the same).

Re: censoring - Like Dan, when I first read the line they censored my mind also jumped immediately to a woman complaining that her boyfriend can't get her off, and not a man. I think that's mostly down to the stereotype (probably based in truth) that a lot of cis women aren't sexually satisfied by their male partners due to the assumption that male orgasm = end goal of sex, without considering the woman's needs/desires: thus, my mind automatically assumed it was most likely a woman typing that into google due to that common cultural stereotype/'joke'. I also think dnp are hyper-aware of their mostly female audience, and therefore don't want to come across as sexualising women, thus they stumbled over that sentence. Plus, I think the way it was worded is just generally considered more crude than 'get off', so they probably figured it was more appropriate to censor it

In other news: On tumblr today I've seen people lamenting the fact that the phandom has seemingly 'disappeared' recently and I was honestly kind of taken aback. I didn't really get that vibe - I haven't noticed less engagement in the phandom, and personally I've found the last few months to be the most enjoyable time period that I've ever experienced in the land of Dan and Phil (I've been here on and off since late 2012).

They've been uploading more frequently (usually several videos a week and two live shows), they've been more relaxed and open than they have in a long time, there's been some really exciting/lovely things happening (BONCAS/gamingmas/IoM/Singapore/moving house/Florida trip with the Lesters) etc - all of this has been really engaging to me, and it's been so nice to see them so seemingly happy and relaxed.

So I was just wondering, have you guys picked up on this at all? Does it seem like the phandom is declining to you? Are people getting bored? Maybe I'm just oblivious to everything, or maybe phandom participation just ebbs and flows as all fandoms do, or maybe people are just talking themselves into the idea that the phandom is dying out and panicking for no reason

[cherrybomb3]

no white lighters till i fuck my 28th up

[alittledizzy]

I thought Dan was turning to the side to google why white lighters are bad, and since it's a superstition amongst stoners deciding the answer wasn't appropriate to include.

In other news: On tumblr today I've seen people lamenting the fact that the phandom has seemingly 'disappeared' recently and I was honestly kind of taken aback. I didn't really get that vibe - I haven't noticed less engagement in the phandom, and personally I've found the last few months to be the most enjoyable time period that I've ever experienced in the land of Dan and Phil (I've been here on and off since late 2012).

I think the people lamenting that are kind of in a bubble of their own making. If they're in cliques or niches in phandom that have been around for years, maybe their friends are bored of Dan and Phil and are developing new interests; but I don't think it's indicative of lessened phandom activity across the board. If you follow 200 people and 50 of them that were in phandom are suddenly posting non-phandom stuff it would look representative of a lot of decreased activity, even if... it isn't, actually.

I mean, IDB is a prime example of how new people are coming in all the time. You just have to be in a situation where you're open to talking to new people to see that. With twitter and tumblr, that can be difficult; you only see the people you've already chosen to follow and not too much gets past those self-inflicted filters.

[autumnhearth]

I have spent my birthday morning googling what 'tickle my bum' means

I couldn't find a straight answer. Only some people saying that it literally means what it says it means. So??? I don't know. I will delete my history now though.

Happy Birthday lishachu I hope you have a lovely day and year ahead!

I think he chose the phrase 'tickle my bum' because it rhymes with 'make me come' (which honestly I don't find that crude, except when written as cum, weird.) Really interesting observations about the censorship and general treatment of female sexuality.

(I also what to make it clear that I'm *not* calling for more censorship from D&P so my kid can watch. I was only responding to viewer age ranges, which Phil has always been conscious about. I am in charge of what I expose my son too, and when we come across language or topics during the videos I have decided are okay, we discuss them.)

Re: drugs. I guess I've never really thought of it, being someone who also hates smoking and didn't get anything out of trying it in college. I get annoyed by all the 420 and blaze it comments on videos. And yet, I guess a lot of my friends and siblings do partake occasionally and I could see them, particularly Dan maybe using it as an anxiety coping/relaxation meathod. But who knows. Did anyone else notice in Dan's last liveshow when he was asked if he got/read people's letters and he confirmed, mentioned storage and then talked about being 80 and looking back on being a YouTuber, before the drug scandal? What was up with that? Probably just weird humor I know.

I love everyone's thoughts on personas, though I did go to bed last night a bit paranoid that AmazingPhil was completely fabricated and that the guys were miserable, which I then reasoned how is that different from being an actor? I was tired. But the comments this morning have cheered me up.

I wonder if the conspiracy theory talk was a dig at a certain someone or if Dan is secretly into that kind of stuff himself and is being tsundere

I wondered this as well. Does anyone know what Dan is doing with his hand at 3:50?

no white lighters till i fuck my 28th up

Wow I was going to question this, but decided to Google it first. Frank Ocean. Strong branding mate. (Perhaps he was looking for his album).

[plath]

Whilst I would normally agree with you, I have a friend whos little brother watches their sims videos and videos akin to them (google feud and the like). He's around 5-6, quiet young and just watches them (the gaming channel videos) because he likes the games, so censoring is useful in instances such as his. I think in general gaming channels have typically either younger or cruder audiences, depending on who you market your videos towards - Dan and Phil picked their niche (which exists within their regular brand anyway) and they're stuck with it unless they wished to steadily rebrand - but why would they? The "Dan and Phil" brand has brought them success due to the contrasting personalities, any rebrand with more explicit conversations/less censorship would be taken with caution and hesitancy if they wanted to potentially cut off a portion of their audience.

Obvs I don't think they should be forced to censor themselves, and Phil has expressed subtle discontent at the "innocent, no-swearing" box he has built for himself, but the dynamics work. People enjoy the juxtaposition, yet harmony, in their personalities. I think it's the balance that makes them so popular.

putting more irrelevant ramble under a spoiler before this gets long.

I feel as though a majority of people who are introduced to dnp, from what i've observed in comments, find Dan as the one they relate to. His cruder, light-hearted self-depricating humour -his exasperation with Phil when he makes a comment. Phil balances out the "Dan" persona, he has the "innocence" and innuendos that Dan often lacks, the "naivety" which people either take seriously, or understand that he is hyping it up for humour (which is fine).

Phil's persona is where a majority of casual fans automatically lean towards Dan, especially younger ones. They see his more explicit humour and relate to it, sometimes scorning Phil for his "innocence". Then come in the fans who proclaim Phil an "innocent pure angel bean" and "ohmygod phil SWORE?! this ray of sunshine could never swear oh my goddd" - however, many of them take the sense of superiority. They understand what Phil is saying, and are shocked that Phil could ever come close to saying ANYTHING wrong, and honestly act quite condescending.

Those are the personalities and reactions I've observed at face value.

Obvs as we get into liveshows and old content, peoples opinions tend to change. Dan suddenly appears more insightful, intelligent, softer than his "danisnotonfire" (oops lmao) persona. People's appreciation for him turns from just appreciating his sardonic sense of humour to a more personal, softer tone.

The thing that's different about Phil, is that although he does become slightly more relaxed in, say, liveshows, the personality change isn't as drastic (unless ur us and can psychoanalyse every sentence). So people still only observe Phil at face-value and continue to treat him the same as prior - even upon seeing his nature in old 2009/2010 images, screenshots etc. it's met with surprise and often not much character change.

So people find the balance in the humour, in the innuendos, in the personalities. People can pick to favour Dan's edgier sense of humour, or Phil for his innocence and oddities.

It's the first thing you see in almost anything they send to the wide public. They introduce themseleves, Phil says something slightly socially unacceptable/filled with innuendos, Dan is silent staring at Phil, before he repeats his phrase in a high-pitched tone, Phil describes it, Dan reacts with incredulity before they continue and finish the video.

It's 2:30am, I'm tired and thinking.

tldr; Phil's lack of actual personality prevents people from favouring him. They favour Dan simply because of his personality being more open. Make a good duo due to the balance in humour.

blablah idk it's late n in tired, i have loads of more articulate opinions regarding this topic, esp how interviewers, for example, strerotype etc.

This is a really interesting point and I think you're right about this. Personally I have difficulty connecting with Phil because there's just so much persona in the way. I like him, obviously, but I feel like I barely know him at all. I like having a sense of engagement with a real person, which is why I like Dan a lot more.

When Phil plays up the "innocent tol bean" schtick I rme but at the same time, it's like...this dynamic obviously works for them. Phil's the wacky one, Dan's the sarcastic one. Or whatever. That's fine for videos but I just wish in liveshows or whatever Phil would relax a little bit and let us see the real him a bit more? But I guess he's just an incredibly private person, which is fair enough.

The over-censoring and Santa Claus stuff irritates me sometimes but then I remind myself that not everything is made for me and that's fine. I'm in my late 20s but a large portion of D&P audience are children. One of the things that I like about D&P so much is how aware they are of themselves as role models. I wish the people I'd looked up to as a child had been such good examples, I definitely wouldn't have had such messy teenage years.

[confusedpanda]

So this was an interesting comparison I saw on my feed this morning. The first photo is from the video where phil was looking though his photos on his phone. I'm pretty sure in the video he said it was from when they were looking for flats in London the first time and that the lounge was huge and circular. But I can't get over how similar it look to the new place.. While I'm not convinced it's the same place, it's still pretty interesting that it does look almost the same.

[captainspacecoat]

I think the people lamenting that are kind of in a bubble of their own making. If they're in cliques or niches in phandom that have been around for years, maybe their friends are bored of Dan and Phil developing new interests; but I don't think it's indicative of lessened phandom activity across the board. If you follow 200 people and 50 of them that were in phandom are suddenly posting non-phandom stuff it would look representative of a lot of decreased activity, even if... it isn't, actually.

I mean, IDB is a prime example of how new people are coming in all the time. You just have to be in a situation where you're open to talking to new people to see that. With twitter and tumblr, that can be difficult; you only see the people you've already chosen to follow and not too much gets past those self-inflicted filters.

Yeah, I definitely agree with this! I also feel that by repetitively lamenting the potential demise of the phandom, it sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts? Like, the more people go on about how their popularity is waning the more they start to believe it, regardless of actual facts re: views and fandom engagement. It's interesting to observe, but I definitely don't think it's as much of an epidemic as some people are making it out to be.

confusedpanda it does look very similar! The view out the window looks different though, there looks to be more trees outside their current flat, and I think the floor might be different as well? It could very well be a different flat in the same building, or just a very similar looking one.

Also happy birthday lishachi, have a great day!!!

[rizzo]

So this was an interesting comparison I saw on my feed this morning. The first photo is from the video where phil was looking though his photos on his phone. I'm pretty sure in the video he said it was from when they were looking for flats in London the first time and that the lounge was huge and circular. But I can't get over how similar it look to the new place.. While I'm not convinced it's the same place, it's still pretty interesting that it does look almost the same.

Oh shit. This is eerily similar. The only thing that really throws me off is that the "columns" between the windows go over the framing of the window in Dan's photo, while they don't in Phil's. Otherwise, I'd be totally convinced and like... Can you imagine? Talk about hiding in plain sight.

[onetruetrash]

I wonder if the conspiracy theory talk was a dig at a certain someone or if Dan is secretly into that kind of stuff himself and is being tsundere

Oh my god, I didn't even realize that that might've been shade

Re: drugs - I don't know, if they did smoke weed then I would imagine it might just be for anxiety or a relaxation method like autumnhearth said. autumnhearth also brought up the "before the drug scandal" comment by Dan which I thought was weird too. I don't know the laws on weed in the UK so I don't know if it would be illegal if they did.

Edit: I just realized that Truth or Dare 2 was unlisted. I understand why.

[alittledizzy]

So someone on tumblr just pointed out to me that Dan's Truth or Dare 2 video us unlisted. People only started noticing within the last few weeks, so I'm guessing it's recent. (Perhaps something he's doing as he goes through updating social media links?)



the description now says: unlisted bc problematic 2010 humour is bad

There are plenty of other references in it that are problematic that are valid reasons to want to unlist it, but it's also the video where he plays gay chicken with Phil. I wonder if wanting to downplay that strong early denial-esque moment was part of it?

Either way, props to Dan for handling this the way he did - he's not erasing it's existence but it won't be something that someone stumbles across accidentally.

[autumnhearth]

So this was an interesting comparison I saw on my feed this morning. The first photo is from the video where phil was looking though his photos on his phone. I'm pretty sure in the video he said it was from when they were looking for flats in London the first time and that the lounge was huge and circular. But I can't get over how similar it look to the new place.. While I'm not convinced it's the same place, it's still pretty interesting that it does look almost the same.

Oh shit. This is eerily similar. The only thing that really throws me off is that the "columns" between the windows go over the framing of the window in Dan's photo, while they don't in Phil's. Otherwise, I'd be totally convinced and like... Can you imagine? Talk about hiding in plain sight.

While the two places have similar appeal (modern with lots of windows) there are major differences. The columns for sure. The size and framing of the windows. The window dressings. The flooring. I know it's hard to tell because the foreground is dark on the left, but I think the flooring is dark, or at least not super light and it has more texture (not smooth and glossy). I'm also not convinced the new place's living room is "round". But what is interesting is that this architectural style appeals to both of them