Dan & Phil Part 75: @philsthiccbooty

[DryCereal]

I mean... you've got to give any remaining phanti's credit for their determination these days, and the "it's all faked for profits" is about the only reasoning that isn't laughable. Let 'em have that, if it's what keeps 'em happy... Why you'd want to stan people you genuinely believe would do such a thing is beyond me, but...

Anyway, if Dan's thing really happened that airport person needs to get their eyesight checked, wtf

Ehhh... maybe yes, maybe no. If Dan was skulking round the airport, hunched over his phone/switch/3ds trying to ignore the world, he could very much resemble a gangly 15/16 year old boy. No drama though, all's he'd have to do is wave his passport under their nose. It's like getting ID'd in your 30s. S'a bloody compliment.

[Birdie]

Late to the discussion (and this meme) with Starbucks, as usual: I was a casual fan for the longest time and I have to admit I used to read some “anti-phan” blogs and I saw demon used there to mean extreme shippers and basically the kind of people every fandom has that take stuff too far, don’t respect the real people behind their ship, are rude to other fans who don’t ship them etc. So basically not all shippers, just the rude ones. That was years ago though and maybe the meaning of the word shifted in that time but that’s what I associate with the term.

I was surprised when I first came here and saw people proudly call themselves demon(s) but I guess it means different things for different people? (I prefer you guys’ meaning of it though, it’s so much less mean.) I don’t think the phandom agrees on what it actually means at all and I think that’s interesting too.

And since we’re at it: I still consider myself “phan agnostic” (is that even still a thing) but it’s so weird to me that people are still anti in 2018. I think I was anti a few years ago when their dynamic was very different and we had 2012 fresh on our minds but ever since late 2016, things have changed so much. If they came out as a couple tomorrow, I wouldn’t bat an eye and it baffles me that there are still people who really consider them being a couple completely unrealistic. I mean, I get not shipping them and I get leaning towards them not being together or even not caring at all, but being full on anti in 2018 is weird to me because it ignores a lot of newer context (even though of course nothing is proven and I'm not sure myself but how can you not even wonder if maybe they are actually together everything considered?).

I’m also really glad that people who believe they are together and people who don’t believe it usually seem to get along really well these days. The phandom could be such a toxic place back when phannies and anti-phannies still fought to the death over who was right and I’m glad to see way less of that these days.

[Winston]

I mean there still might be that toxic atmosphere in here (the phandom) if there were more (than 3) antis out there. The majority seems to be either realistic shippers, people who just really believe (not in a !!OMG LOOK HOW CUTE AHHHH!! way) or those of us who are agnostic at the very least. I hate to say it but I think what most of us want is just for those two to just be happy. For me, it would be hard for me to picture them happy in other relationships. But if they are, or do so in the future more power to them.

I’m also really glad that people who believe they are together and people who don’t believe it usually seem to get along really well these days. The phandom could be such a toxic place back when phannies and anti-phannies still fought to the death over who was right and I’m glad to see way less of that these days.

[lesterchuu]

i wasnt going to jump in this conversation because i thought everyone had good points said already, but i just wanted to point out @Katka's gif made me laugh cz same

tbh i never had any idea where the demon term came from as ive literally ONLY heard or read about it after i came back to the dnp fandom. back in 2012~2014 or something (my concept of time is really bad) before i left it, i remember having to use different tags for my posts because you get heavily judged for tagging something shippy using their "amazingphil" and "danisnotonfire (rip)" tags. i remember tagging "dan and phil" for more tame posts and "phan" for more shippy ones. and the only acceptable reason to ship them is "bromance/platonic friendship" because otherwise people will burn you at the stake. i wonder if at that time, the word "demon" was already being used by antis but ive never really sought out to them.

so it was actually kind of interesting to me to know that it all started out as a derogatory term for shippers. i find it amusing how weve collectively hijacked said word and used it on our own terms - further evolving its meaning. and for anyone that had joined (or re-joined) recently, we wouldve never known. i had to learn some new "lingo" like the rats thing (which im still unsure of where it originated from), capita£ester, demon shippers, and etc. in general, fandoms are like mini-societies with their own cultures and more specifically, pseudo-languages: linguistics 101 yall, im all for it.

also,

I mean there still might be that toxic atmosphere in here (the phandom) if there were more (than 3) antis out there. The majority seems to be either realistic shippers, people who just really believe (not in a !!OMG LOOK HOW CUTE AHHHH!! way) or those of us who are agnostic at the very least. I hate to say it but I think what most of us want is just for those two to just be happy. For me, it would be hard for me to picture them happy in other relationships. But if they are, or do so in the future more power to them.

(nods in agreement)

[Stakhanov]

I will absolutely not interact with you anymore. Sounds great. A final thought: the old projection is not a good look. I don't insert myself in fantasies about strangers, be it celebs or forum people. Besides, it wouldn't be necessary to fantasize, because you know we can read what you publicly post on a public online space, right? How you feel about Dan and how you think d&p are deceiving the public (aka us), in your own words? Sorry I made that explicit in one post, my bad.

And sorry to disagree, bluewho, but I think frequently telling a group of people when they're happily immersed in a communal discussion of certain events (and always aware we're all speculating) that their ideas are the intentional, designed product of targeted manipulation, is more hostile and insulting than bringing attention to the op's pattern in the first place. I guess I could've worded it better, that's true.

-

Also apologies to whoever is bored scrolling past this, my last ever post along these lines. I just love this space a lot and the cool things it generates.

*Leaves chanting Phil Merch, Phil Merch, Phil Merch*

Funny how you talk about projection after you try to armchair diagnose me as being fixated with Dan, try to mock my point of view as just something I'd say because I like Dan ("Dankanov fantasies") and then make a bunch of erratic, rude conclusions about what i must surely be thinking about 'the fandom'

I talk a lot with people in this fandom who believe they are a romantic couple. We have different opinions about who they are as people and if they're a couple, but I don't think they are "idiots being manipulated at the expense of d&p's own happines". I don't think the fandom consists of 'blind morons' and I don't even understand your weird idea of Phil as a "lowly pleb who could capture the romantic and sexual attention of Dan".
You're right about one thing though: they did deny they were in a relationship years ago, like it or not. So are you telling they were being untruthful, lying? Were deceiving us then, because you sure seem quick to judge everyone who doesn't agree to your personal notion of what and who they are as some cartoonish villain who must have "hostile and insulting" intention ruining your lovely communal discussion of events that must fit within your frame of reference.

Yea, you are a joy to interact with, but please save me from the 'patterns' you're spotting in your own mind to justify calling people delusional or moronic only to try putting them in my mouth after.


~ Demons and other charged terms like(anti)phan. Interesting reflections.
I think demons is mostly used as what we call a "geuzennaam" in Dutch: a term that conventionally has a negative connotation, but that gets proudly used as a "badge of honor" within a community.

As for people being "anti phannies", I think that's a term that's poorly chosen as it doesn't reflect the views of people who are sometimes called "anti's". I guess it depends on how you define it. To me, being an "anti" phannie would mean that you are against/ "anti" the very idea that they would be together, as in it would be somehow wrong for them to be a couple. I don't really have met anyone who is truly against them being a couple though ? I certainly ain't. However, a good deal of people don't think they are a romantic couple. I'm going by the fandom survey here, though I think it's really difficult to accurately measure these views and my impression is that on IDB the views are skewed and more people than 'on average' view them as a couple. Just my opinion, don't shoot me if you think i'm wrong

Being unconvinced they are a couple is entirely different from thinking they "shouldn't" be a couple though. Unless that is your actual view, i think "antiphan" is a misnomer because you're not 'anti' the idea. I think it's insidious in a way, though I don't think the vast majority of people intend to use it maliciously and are just having some fun. Why? Because I see a resemblance with how the abortion debate is framed in the US. Opponents of abortion will often call people who support it as "anti-life", while I don't think that most people supporting abortion don't support life or even life in the womb. The whole point ( or at least that of secular humanists) is that in the early stages of the pregnancy the 'life' you speak of is not comparable to a human life and so the dividing cells in the womb should not be granted the same rights as a human. And that you have to balance any rights you would endow a fetus with, with the liberty of a woman to choose and have control over her own body.
So yea I don't think there are many 'anti's' around, but there are certainly still a lot of people who are on the fence or don't particularly care about it or just think it's not implausible. And others who consider it a given or think it's most likely to be true. I'd hope a difference in opinion like this doesn't have to lead to big fights or even online bullying, i'd think that would reflect very poorly on what it means to be part of the "Dan and Phil" fandom and is about as dumb as the fights there used to be about "Dannies" vs. "Philies". It's not a holy war, it's a diverse community of people with different views that are hopefully brought together by a shared interest and appreciation for Dan and Phil.

[Stakhanov]

I mean there still might be that toxic atmosphere in here (the phandom) if there were more (than 3) antis out there. The majority seems to be either realistic shippers, people who just really believe (not in a !!OMG LOOK HOW CUTE AHHHH!! way) or those of us who are agnostic at the very least. I hate to say it but I think what most of us want is just for those two to just be happy. For me, it would be hard for me to picture them happy in other relationships. But if they are, or do so in the future more power to them.

I’m also really glad that people who believe they are together and people who don’t believe it usually seem to get along really well these days. The phandom could be such a toxic place back when phannies and anti-phannies still fought to the death over who was right and I’m glad to see way less of that these days.

Very much agreed i hope that they are happy, whatever they are. If that means what I thought about them was entirely wrong, I would not jump ship (ok poorly worded) but I mean I am not somebody whose support of them depends on if they have always said the truth about anything and i expect them to have some flaws and occasionally do things i disagree with, they're only human.
The one thing that would truly shock me though is if they secretly hated each other or if it came to light their friendship has completely died out, but I have good hopes they kinda like each other :mrgreen:

[phanfckingtastic]

Oof, that reading comprehension needs work, honey.
Also, again, your online posts about dan and phil are public, I thought you knew that. Stating that you consistently and publicly thirst/profess love for Dan is a mere observation, not a diagnosis. One that touched a nerve, apparently.
Anyway, I'm here for positive things, not to hijack the thread with weird bullshit from an internet stranger. Bye.

[alittledizzy]

A couple sightings in the wild:

And a cute meet and greet pic, bc aw they're twinning! (Also really digging Phil's shirt.)

[hello9217]

Another shirt gifted to him by a viewer.

(Shirts from Walmart in case anyone was interested

[lilabet]

I’m not hating on them but why are people gifting them shirts? They can afford their own clothes and if they don’t wear them people will be offended. I thought they asked for no gifts?

Not trying to snark but there are people who need clothes or even food way more than these rich guys

[ratlad]

i luv phil's nasa shirt......... hell yes.... i love when they get new clothes, im a tacky fashion gay.

unrelated, but funny? weird? anyway, i was in a thrift store today with my sister and she found an old pixel dnp iphone case that was still in its packaging, she showed it to me and asked if it was dnp and i was like.... yea.... :/
she hated the design lmao. wonder why it was there, unopened, still packaged?? i know hardly anyone in my province (i could just stop there) who watches dnp.

i want the countdown tweets to phil merch. maybe the later he puts it out, the closer i can order it for my bday. the year is coming to an end too fast. help me.

[Ablissa]

I’m not hating on them but why are people gifting them shirts? They can afford their own clothes and if they don’t wear them people will be offended. I thought they asked for no gifts?

Not trying to snark but there are people who need clothes or even food way more than these rich guys

Yeah, I'm a bit surprised at them accepting shirts from fans.
I don't mind people spending money on dnp - it's their money and while it would be much better spent on charity or even something for themselves, it's still theirs (or their parents') to spend. So yeah, do what you want with the money, I get wanting to give the guys a gift, but a letter or some art feels much more thoughtful.
A shirt is such a risky gift - it might not fit, they might not like it, they might never wear it and thus make the person sad, or they might wear one from person A and not one from person B making person B super sad. Also, I don't like the idea of people forcing dnp to wear certain things, such as when fans are gifting Dan nail polish or lipsticks. They're not dolls, ffs. :/

Also, we have to take these "they're wearing my shirt" reports with a grain of salt. I'm too lazy to look into it properly, but anyone can say that about anything dnp are wearing and it doesn't necessarily have to be true.

[alittledizzy]

I actually do believe they're wearing fan gifted shirts on this tour - and I think it's solely to have some variety in wardrobe. One suitcase each for 2+ months has resulted in a lot of repeat meet and greet outfits, and I think they probably like avoiding that when they can.

Phil also seems easier to buy for/more inclined to like things that fans give him. So I'm kind of not as surprised to see Phil wearing multiple fan gifts, whereas Dan mostly sticks to his own packed outfits.

[KatjaZoe]

honestly its ridiculous how people get attacked for not shipping phan. its not a prerequisite to believe they're together to be in the phandom or to be a member of this forum. people seem so sure that there's no one left in the phandom who doesnt ship them but maybe it just seems that way bc a lot of the time the reaction to an anti is so aggressive.

also you can be a dannie and that doesn't have to be the reason you don't believe they're in a relationship. for example i do have a preference towards dan (i do also love phil) but the reason i lean towards them not being in a relationship has nothing to do with that and more because i see a lot of similarities between their friendship and my own best friends. not everyone fits into these black & white stereotypes that the phandom has made of demons and antis. i follow blogs of shippers, occasionally read fic, but mostly i think they aren't actually dating. there is a middle ground. and everyone should be allowed to express their own opinions.

[liola]

I've never seen a "believer" attack an anti on the pure fact that they're an anti. You know, there's a difference between jokingly saying "wow is there even antis left in 2018 they must be quaking" and some antis going off about how people that believe dnp are together are manipulated bc dnp are lowkey queerbaiting and only care about money plus believing they're together is disrespectful and fetishizing them. Mind you this is all stuff that has been actually said over time, some of it even on this forum. So yeah there's a middle ground but way more often what happens is that antis act like they're wise and knowledgeable while everyone that believes is naive, without even considering the context.

Also sorry but if your friendships include a decade of living together, share couple vacations, a love letter in video form that reference having sex and declarations of love on top of building a life together and planning to buy a house and getting a dog, maybe you should reconsider how platonic those friendships are. Sorry but the argument of comparing their relationship to others always irk me.

Anyway re shirts gifted by fan, I actually think it's a nice thing? Sure, it's a risky gift and it hhappened to me that I gifted shirts to a band member I really liked and he never wore it, but the gift was my choice and my money. That doesn't mean someone isn't also doing something for the poor. There's many people who buy clothes even when they have a lot of it just for the sake of it, so gifting it to someone, whether that someone is wealthy or not isn't that different imo. On why they are accepting them when they said they wouldn't I mean, what are you gonna do once a fan is in front of you giving you a gift, turn them away thus actually wasting the money/time/energy they spent on it?

[KatjaZoe]

Also sorry but if your friendships include a decade of living together, share couple vacations, a love letter in video form that reference having sex and declarations of love on top of building a life together and planning to buy a house and getting a dog, maybe you should reconsider how platonic those friendships are. Sorry but the argument of comparing their relationship to others always irk me.

this is exactly the kind of problem i have, i simply say dnp's friendship reminds me of my own friendships but somehow without knowing anything about my life or friends you know my opinion is wrong? and my best friends and i must actually not be platonic??
because minus the vday video (which i don't think is fair to use as evidence for multiple reasons) yes that does exactly describe my best friend that i've been living with since early 2012 (less than a year difference than dnp). guess i'll have to break it to him that he's not actually gay and we're dating now.

would i be surprised if dan and phil were actually a couple? no absolutely not. but because of similarities in my own life i simply don't think thats the only possible explanation. and as i said in my last post, just because my opinion is not the most popular one does not mean its not valid.

(i'm sorry if this comes off a little aggressive but the implication of having to "question how platonic my friendships are" bothered me)

[liola]

Also sorry but if your friendships include a decade of living together, share couple vacations, a love letter in video form that reference having sex and declarations of love on top of building a life together and planning to buy a house and getting a dog, maybe you should reconsider how platonic those friendships are. Sorry but the argument of comparing their relationship to others always irk me.

this is exactly the kind of problem i have, i simply say dnp's friendship reminds me of my own friendships but somehow without knowing anything about my life or friends you know my opinion is wrong? and my best friends and i must actually not be platonic??
because minus the vday video (which i don't think is fair to use as evidence for multiple reasons) yes that does exactly describe my best friend that i've been living with since early 2012 (less than a year difference than dnp). guess i'll have to break it to him that he's not actually gay and we're dating now.

would i be surprised if dan and phil were actually a couple? no absolutely not. but because of similarities in my own life i simply don't think thats the only possible explanation. and as i said in my last post, just because my opinion is not the most popular one does not mean its not valid.

(i'm sorry if this comes off a little aggressive but the implication of having to "question how platonic my friendships are" bothered me)

But see that's the thing. You choose to think using the vday video is not fair (and I'm not saying it's right, we all understand its a private thing that sadly got public without being entirely the phandom fault) but by doing that we're ignoring a big big part of their history and why people believe they're together. We can't just ignore the context. I too have friends that I've gone to vacations with, have lived with,, hell I've slept with in really not romantic situations. You realize that ignoring an entire video where they talk about a romantic relationship undermines the whole thing. (And yes, I do believe they actively lied about it aka lied about being a joke because it's pretty obvious what happened there. That in itself I wouldn't even consider lying to the audience, just a gut reaction out of fear)

I wasn't trying to imply anything about you relationship and I'm sorry if I came across as snarky, I was being sarcastic because the argument of people comparing their relationship to theirs is something we had enough. Not every relationship is the same, not at all, and that's why there's no point comparing them. Dan and Phil have a decade of history, and my point is: the most logic conclusion for a lot of us, when we look at ALL the things that make their relationship is a romantic couple. It's obvious that a lot of other relationship can check the same box, I doubt all of them

[fieldoflovers]

I don't have anything to add to the current discussion because I feel like its the 1383883th time I'm reading the same conversation, but I just wanted to pop in and say, how I absolutely proud I was of them, at their LA show, despite not being there. The insta story right afterwards, they seem so content and they really deserve that and i hope they continue to have a good time on tour<3

That being said, tomorrow is my show, and I excited yet nervous even though I don't have VIP it feels surreal. oh my god they're people, wow, can u believe, will possibly report back with a review or smthing

[Ablissa]

This discussion comes back to IDB every now and then and every time I see it I have the exact same thoughts. I'm not sure why I'm participating this time because I know this conversation always ends up in a frustrating loop so if I don't respond to this again I'm sorry. I just feel like sharing my thoughts.

Without trying to offend anyone (I'm not responding to any person in particular and this is just a summary of what I'm often seeing) - okay, so your particular experience is that you and your best friend live together, plan a futue together, do everything together, work together, share 90% of your interests and have a history that heavily implies a romantic connection. That's fantastic and I'm happy for you.

You've got to understand this is not that common, though. I'll counter your argument with "I rarely speak to anyone including my best friend and I would probably hate them if I had to socialize with them 24/7" and use that as "phan proof" because I have the exact opposite best friend experience = they must be more than friends because my friendship is different. This is a bit of a backwards logic, but frankly I'm a little tired of seeing that argument being made over and over.

Just because one person or twenty or a thousand have a similar (platonic) relationship to Dan and Phil does not mean that other facts should be disregarded. Even ignoring the vday video there are plenty of things that they both have said and done over the years that strongly suggest something more than a pair of platonic bros.

If you choose to ignore that and believe the (I believe) less likely alternative of them being just friends, good for you. But then keep in mind that you are not seeing the full picture and are basing your opinion merely on "it is like this for me so it has to be like this for them too".

Edit to add: at some point it's best to stop trying to bend over backwards and rationalize things instead of just accepting the fact that if the majority of things heavily imply something then it just might be true.

[Stakhanov]

@KatjaZoe I agree, the demon -anti / dannie-philie descriptions are just labels which don't say a much imo. And I personally see similarities between Dan and Phil and my own circle of friends too. Dan and Phil's circumstances are extraordinary but a lot what they do just screams 'good friends' to me. I'm not basing my opinion about their relationship on simularities i see with my own friends and I don't think you do either. But I do think it's valuable to point out that nothing in what they do is not also the lived reality of some good friends. Even if it's statistically uncommon, it's not _that_ rare that most of us can't think of a couple of tight friends that share much more of their lives than the sort of friendship that maybe 'most' people experience in their own life.

--
If you think Dan and Phil are all about 'queerbaiting' (and think that's a grave moral offense), purely driven by money and nothing else and that all people are doing is constantly fetishizing them (and nothing else), I do wonder why you keep watching them to start with, but then I also think that people who are critical about almost everything they do still are free to call themselves fans. It's not a protected profession xd. A lot of issues that get raised about them i personally take no offense with, but other people find them important and offer their commentary and that's part of the value of a forum like this.

--
~just saw your new reply.
Yea I think a lot of people here would agree that just because you live together with a friend, or just because you holiday together, or any of the things that we know about them doesn't mean that they are gay or a couple. Does sharing some clothes make you a gay couple? Does finding a couple of shoes or a hair straightener make someone a gay couple? Does living together with someone of the same gender make you a gay couple? I don't think so and I'd hope nobody else thinks so.
I don't mean to say that anyone is implying that here, but an argument I have heard before (not targeting anyone specific here) is that all the things they do 'in context' or when taken together would point to them being a couple. I disagree. Everything I have seen so far can be explained as two people sharing life as close friends - being also bound together even closer by extraordinary circumstances.
Or alternatively if you reject their own statements about the nature of their relationship you can view their behavior as consistent with a romantic couple living together.
--

Two specific points that you bring up @liola and that I would raise objection with:
-vday vid: well i believe what they say about it and so I don't think it's a personal love letter so I don't see a reason to reassess on the basis of that video
-"building a life together and planning to buy a house and getting a dog": Do you mean the statements about a 'forever home' as put forth in the liveshow just after they moved? I've rewatched that liveshow before and here's a little clip and basically they never said that they, together, would buy a home in the future. Somebody asks the rather charged question WHEN they will get a dog (assuming they will get one anyway) and in response Dan says " When A house is bought i guess. When there ain't no landlord." Phil then says he would like to get a fish and a couple of sentences later Dan says " I mean, this isn't A forever home". So nothing of what they said has to mean that they are building a future together here, they could both buy a house or get a dog and in as far as these words are supposed to support the idea that they are building a long term future in a shared house with their future dog I'm not convinced that's what they are saying there, it's just one way to interpret what they are actually saying.

[Stakhanov]

@KatjaZoe I agree, the demon -anti / dannie-philie descriptions are just labels which don't say a much imo. And I personally see similarities between Dan and Phil and my own circle of friends too. Dan and Phil's circumstances are extraordinary but a lot what they do just screams 'good friends' to me. I'm not basing my opinion about their relationship on simularities i see with my own friends and I don't think you do either. But I do think it's valuable to point out that nothing in what they do is not also the lived reality of some good friends. Even if it's statistically uncommon, it's not _that_ rare that most of us can't think of a couple of tight friends that share much more of their lives than the sort of friendship that maybe 'most' people experience in their own life.

--
If you think Dan and Phil are all about 'queerbaiting' (and think that's a grave moral offense), purely driven by money and nothing else and that all people are doing is constantly fetishizing them (and nothing else), I do wonder why you keep watching them to start with, but then I also think that people who are critical about almost everything they do still are free to call themselves fans. It's not a protected profession xd. A lot of issues that get raised about them i personally take no offense with, but other people find them important and offer their commentary and that's part of the value of a forum like this.

--
~just saw your new reply.
Yea I think a lot of people here would agree that just because you live together with a friend, or just because you holiday together, or any of the things that we know about them doesn't mean that they are gay or a couple. Does sharing some clothes make you a gay couple? Does finding a couple of shoes or a hair straightener make someone a gay couple? Does living together with someone of the same gender make you a gay couple? I don't think so and I'd hope nobody else thinks so.
I don't mean to say that anyone is implying that here, but an argument I have heard before (not targeting anyone specific here) is that all the things they do 'in context' or when taken together would point to them being a couple. I disagree. Everything I have seen so far can be explained as two people sharing life as close friends - being also bound together even closer by extraordinary circumstances.
Or alternatively if you reject their own statements about the nature of their relationship you can view their behavior as consistent with a romantic couple living together.

Two specific points that you bring up liola and that I would like to politely raise objection with.
I'm not implying you are naive or that i have information or wisdom you don't, I'm just expressing my take on the elements you bring up that you say should maybe lead people to reassess their relationship.

-vday vid: well i believe what they say about it and so I don't think it's a personal love letter so I don't see a reason to reassess on the basis of that video
-"building a life together and planning to buy a house and getting a dog": Do you mean the statements about a 'forever home' as put forth in the liveshow just after they moved? I've rewatched that liveshow before and here's a little clip and basically they never said that they, together, would buy a home in the future. Somebody asks the rather charged question WHEN they will get a dog (assuming they will get one anyway) and in response Dan says " When A house is bought i guess. When there ain't no landlord." Phil then says he would like to get a fish and a couple of sentences later Dan says " I mean, this isn't A forever home". So nothing of what they said has to mean that they are building a future together here, they could both buy a house or get a dog and in as far as these words are supposed to support the idea that they are building a long term future in a shared house with their future dog I'm not convinced that's what they are saying there, it's just one way to interpret what they are actually saying.

[liola]

I'll reply to just your last point @Stakhanov because at this point I just don't have enough energy to do much else (it's 2am for me) but I'll say one thing to the vday video: I don't know how anyone can think it's actually fake/a prank and continue to think they're genuine people. If one year from now they ended up showing undeniable proof that it was a prank (like showing a sequel video that if you plan a prank should be going with it) then my opinion on them would drastically change, cause to me they're not people who would think a nice prank is to imply two people are in love with each other and having a romantic relationship, particularly a queer one. But that's me.

About the dog, that clip is just one of the few references they made about a dog together. To me it's much more clear when someone asked him about a dog pre-move during a solo Dan liveshow and Dan said "dog would be good. Phil is obsessed with a corgi, so brace for that" no one asked about phil, the question was directed to dan but he mentioned it in a shared decision way. I believe that's also the liveshow where he talked about adopting strays and made an example about Colin but don't quote me on that cause I might be thinking of another liveshow.

They've implied(and not even implied in some instances) about getting a dog for a while now, it's not just that one time.

[wiccamoody]

This is such a Phil tweet and I love it

[annoying dog]

They've implied(and not even implied in some instances) about getting a dog for a while now, it's not just that one time.

At around 56 minutes

[Stakhanov]

@liola I agree with you about the dog, it's just that the house and dog thing often get quoted together and they do both mention it in that liveshow, though not in the way it often gets tweeted about.
They've both expressed that they would like to get a dog 'some time' and it would be logical that they made that decision together, but getting a dog together when you live together as roommates isn't a strong argument imo of any sort of future they would be planning as a couple. Maybe Phil gets a Corgi and Dan gets another dog. We'll see if and when it happens.

It's also past 2am here ( we're both GMT+1 i guess? ) so forgive me my even worse English as usual and ima try keep it short as I think we both have already given this proper thought as proper :number1: people and I don't think we'll ever be able to come to a full resolution about this.
Basically I put faith in their words when they say it's a prank. What this tells about their genuineness or how you feel that impacts how you generally think about them as people is, to put it blunly, irrelevant to the question of whether the video itself is a prank or a heartfelt expression of their love. That's my opinion, I don't mean to offend but I think it is a bad idea to mix what we think they ought to be as people with what we think the reality of the video is.
They could of course be lying. I've thought about the circumstances, about how they went about trying to explain the video, how they contacted others to not share the video and about possible motivations and the sense and nonsense of things happening as they did and their behavior and I think that they were aware of people shipping them - not that far-fetched an idea given their previous online tweeting and the little they did to fight that that perception. Still even in the very early days they did also deny being a couple e.g. Dan saying they weren't together in his youtube comments. I think that the video was an expression of their own -rather dark- sense of humor and they have said so themselves they thought it was in poor taste, in retrospect.
I do think the culture at the time was a bit different. I spent a lot of times on video cam sites like stickam those days and they certainly weren't the only ones who were painting an ambiguous picture of their own sexuality and they may have used the spontaneous ideas people had about them as a vehicle to garner more attention. I'm not sure if they intended it that way, I don't know to what degree any one single tweet was a genuine reflection about how they felt for each other and I don't know if in the early stages they knew yet how to define their own relationship (as friends or maybe more?).
I also know a lot of people on this forum would find it very offensive if that is what they in fact did and if v-day was just them having a jab at shippers. I think the queerbaiting question that often gets raised in this context has a nuanced answer, and as an lgbt person i personally think that given the context it deserves a nuanced answer. There was a complicated interaction going on between their budding friendship (or more), their rising popularity on youtube (could it become a career?) and a complex dynamic between what they were sharing themselves and the questions and comments that early shippers left, which I think might have provoked them into making a prank video (whether that reaction was just or in good taste is another question entirely).

Anyway good night. I enjoy discussing their past with other people but I imagine it's not everyone's cup of tea and it's pretty late too, so feel free to respond - or not- at your convenience