IDB

Did Phil forget about answering those questions on youtube?

alittledizzy wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:36 pm Did Phil forget about answering those questions on youtube?

Looks like he's answered a few now. Maybe he's just getting started?

Gosh Norman is just *so* pretty. No wonder he’s a proud fish dad.

So.. he answered something like 4 questions, telling us things we already know and then left adgdxbnjd why did he even do that? Did he get paid for it?

The randomness of it all... I am in awe.

glitterintheair wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2019 11:12 pm So.. he answered something like 4 questions, telling us things we already know and then left adgdxbnjd why did he even do that? Did he get paid for it?

The randomness of it all... I am in awe.

definitely seems very random but i actually don’t mind. i’m glad he’s been intentionally more engaged. i appreciate it, i like that he’s making an effort.

Phil is such a youtube dad. I compare him to the more current and "trendy" savvy youtubers right now and it's hilarious. Also very endearing.
How do they manage to upload content to 3 different platforms all the time almost every day is beyond me. Maybe i'm just getting old.

That youtube stories thing was odd, but whatever I'm not complaining about it.

I wasn't able to watch Phil's liveshow while it was happening, but to echo others, I didn't notice any nervousness from him. I actually thought he just seemed a little tired, and from that a little flustered. Given how they've treated going out to events and doing liveshows in the past, I was 60% sure he would cancel it, so my guess is just that he's had a busy work weekend and that definitely takes a toll. (Not to mention that moving is one of the most stressful things a person can do Syncing all those lights sounds very tedious...and we don't even know what other stuff he's had to do in that department lately).

I am curious about the next week, though. Not that deppy do anything for the 19th ever, but a decade is a long time and while I'm not getting my hopes up for anything I am more alert than usual on that front.

I wonder if their want for privacy and not exposing the nature of their relationship is any different from a straight celebrity couple that might want the same? Somehow I think it feels a bit different and by keeping a shroud over their status as a couple then in a way it somehow stigmatizes gay relationships instead of normalizing it. And maybe they will slowly build up to it, but I wonder if there’s a better balance between the vail of mystery and tabloid Kardashians that they want to avoid.

That’s more of a half thought than anything—I suppose it’s born out of being greedy for information especially after years of speculation now that they are open about their sexuality, yet their relationship still feels like it’s in the closet.

Phantasy wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 4:14 am I wonder if their want for privacy and not exposing the nature of their relationship is any different from a straight celebrity couple that might want the same? Somehow I think it feels a bit different and by keeping a shroud over their status as a couple then in a way it somehow stigmatizes gay relationships instead of normalizing it. And maybe they will slowly build up to it, but I wonder if there’s a better balance between the vail of mystery and tabloid Kardashians that they want to avoid.

That’s more of a half thought than anything—I suppose it’s born out of being greedy for information especially after years of speculation now that they are open about their sexuality, yet their relationship still feels like it’s in the closet.

I guess because we haven't heard the typical "I'm in a relationship with Dan/Phil" it can feel that way, but honestly I think since the end of 2014 they've been building up to not hiding their relationship. I think actually coming out like they did this summer was the last step for them to let the glass closet fall. I think they're honest about how they present themselves as best friends and how they are as a couple who wants privacy. We know they live together, we know they adopted a fish together, we know they want to adopt a dog together. We know they go on trips with other couples (first Bryony and Wirrow, now Martyn and Cornelia). We know they go visit Ian and Lauren and Emily in Manchester together. And we know a lot more.

They choose to share these things. They can control what they share about them. I think that's the privacy they want. At least right now, they just don't seem like the kind of couple to do any kind of PDA, and maybe that might change or maybe that's still resting in the fear of being outed but I think that's the privacy they want. Personally, I don't find it stigmatizing because I find the idea of needing to come out or needing to be affectionate with your partner exhausting. I think it normalizes that being in a queer relationship isn't inherently sexual (as many people assume they are), and I think it normalizes that coming out isn't the be all end all of your queer experience.

a slightly different, personal take on this: my girlfriend and I have been together for almost four years and, like, we're as close to married as we can be in this country. we don't make anything a huge secret, but I never state anything official on social media - I'm technically still closeted on Instagram, because I'm not out to my extended family (cause closest family didn't take it all that well). People still know that I live with a girl I post a lot of pictures with, they know we have three cats, they know I go to some ambiguously not-straight events sometimes, but there's never a label. those who know just know. and, you know, part of me wants to be out and open with everything, but there's something amusing about leaving people wondering. deppy's limitations are different (and imposed by themselves more than other people), but I absolutely understand being ambiguous-but-not-really. the need for privacy that they have is a huge thing I don't have to even think about. I think not stating anything official takes off some of the scrutiny but still allows for some openness.

this is an 8am ramble but I tried

Also you may want privacy just for the sake of privacy, not because you're a queer couple. Because they're gay, the fact that dnp want privacy is stigmatising now? You wouldn't say that about a straight couple. Why are queer couples always held to higher standards?

News Flash : you can be queer and wanting privacy without it having to do with your sexuality.

I think having your relationship as a center of your career (unwillingly) is really rare and that's why I wouldn't compare them to other celebrities, gay or straight. After that experience I totally understand they aren't holding hands in public. Can you imagine the chaos phandom would create if there were a pic of them kissing? Yeah imo we would still go crazy over that shit.

Pardon me writing this in the middle of a busy day at work (the most important things come first lol) so I don't have time to be eloquent about this.

WHAT EVEN -

I'm struggling to figure out what to think of that. My initial response was "ew." But I guess they're not closeted anymore, and it's not as strange as Tesco shipping phan when they were closeted.

tbh I would kinda just like to forget the entire TABINOF/TATINOF press tour. It was awkward then, it's even worse now

Heh. It didn’t need that edit. The actual interview was lovely at the time.

Catallena wrote: Tue Oct 15, 2019 4:12 pm tbh I would kinda just like to forget the entire TABINOF/TATINOF press tour. It was awkward then, it's even worse now

that whole time period was an experience and a half. weird answers we all had to logic our way through. all that pre-press tour copywriting? busgate???

i feel like i'm having massive flashbacks right now and this one interview was the only light in a very dark tunnel.

Happy 10 years to Hello Internet today!

There was some drama yesterday on twitter that I just saw very belatedly about someone that I'm guessing is a youtuber? Or at least noteable enough to have many followers/fans. He basically went on a small rant that, based on the response from phandom (and some of his following tweets) I'm assuming was about phandom.
And at least one youtuber jumped in to comment.
I appreciate Melanie's defense of teenage girls having hobbies but the pervasive notion that phandom is a) all teenagers and b) fancy Dan and Phil just feels like a dated concept now. It just makes me think of Dan and Phil in the mukbang last year talking about how everyone thinks their audience is one thing, and it's not.

I'm so tired of that conversation. I'm not in the loop about what spurred it on this time, but we see it like once a month. I never see it from people who find it uncomfortable because it's happening to themselves and want to set boundaries for their own fans, it's always someone trying to police someone else's fans.

I didn’t think she was defending teen girls at all, she’s questioning why shipping rl people is a thing. The constant misunderstanding and minimising of the phandom to teen girls, and of teen girls to idiots, by everyone other than Dan and Phil is too tiring. Such misogyny and lack of interest in an audience as people. Every time, everyone defends that we’re all gay and none of us fancy them, that the ‘fetishists’ are minimal and we’re not them. Tbh I don’t think they exist, everyone denies being them. Well, I’m het, I’ve fancied both of them at one time or another and think they’re sweet together with a lovely love story, without meaning to fetishise their gayness. That’s a strong word that’s thrown around a lot, people are just squeeing in sappiness and happiness for them. Grr, is all else I can say.

flarequake wrote: Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:24 pm I didn’t think she was defending teen girls at all, she’s questioning why shipping rl people is a thing. The constant misunderstanding and minimising of the phandom to teen girls, and of teen girls to idiots, by everyone other than Dan and Phil is too tiring. Such misogyny and lack of interest in an audience as people. Every time, everyone defends that we’re all gay and none of us fancy them, that the ‘fetishists’ are minimal and we’re not them. Tbh I don’t think they exist, everyone denies being them. Well, I’m het, I’ve fancied both of them at one time or another and think they’re sweet together with a lovely love story, without meaning to fetishise their gayness. That’s a strong word that’s thrown around a lot, people are just squeeing in sappiness and happiness for them. Grr, is all else I can say.

Wow, I think you're right. I read it like she was saying why is it on the internet cons list, but I think that was a very optimistic read from me. Yeah I'm gonna go ahead and take back my props from her and replace it with an aggressive eyeroll.

I absolutely agree but also: That guy has a point. Fetishisation of gay people is not okay and it's a problem in fandoms. It has happened in the phandom because it happens in every fandom. And I'm honestly not really okay with the "It's just teenage girls having fun" defence because at whose expense are they having "fun"? And why aren't queer people allowed to be uncomfortable with how non-queer people depict them in fiction, especially when it furthers harmful stereotypes?

This is not directed at anyone in particular, I'm just ranting. As dizzy said, the phandom is not just teenage girls with a crush on Dan and Phil and a lot of us are lgbtq ourselves. But at the same time, I'm not here for the old "Do you hate teenage girls, why can't they have this hobby?" defence because we're allowed to criticise "teenage girls" (and everyone else who fetishises queer people, it's not just teen girls...) when their "hobbies" play into the marginalisation of a minority. And to be fair, I'm seeing a lot of Dan and Phil fans in that guy's mentions telling him to "stay mad" and that's ugly because his point is valid.

(This is very salty and messy, I'm sorry, but this is such an issue and I hate how this kind of criticism from queer people gets swept under the rug all the time.)

Katka wrote: Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:28 pm I absolutely agree but also: That guy has a point. Fetishisation of gay people is not okay and it's a problem in fandoms. It has happened in the phandom because it happens in every fandom. And I'm honestly not really okay with the "It's just teenage girls having fun" defence because at whose expense are they having "fun"? And why aren't queer people allowed to be uncomfortable with how non-queer people depict them in fiction, especially when it furthers harmful stereotypes?

This is not directed at anyone in particular, I'm just ranting. As dizzy said, the phandom is not just teenage girls with a crush on Dan and Phil and a lot of us are lgbtq ourselves. But at the same time, I'm not here for the old "Do you hate teenage girls, why can't they have this hobby?" defence because we're allowed to criticise "teenage girls" (and everyone else who fetishises queer people, it's not just teen girls...) when their "hobbies" play into the marginalisation of a minority. And to be fair, I'm seeing a lot of Dan and Phil fans in that guy's mentions telling him to "stay mad" and that's ugly because his point is valid.

(This is very salty and messy, I'm sorry, but this is such an issue and I hate how this kind of criticism from queer people gets swept under the rug all the time.)

I can understand the fetishizing argument and it has merit. But I think to me it makes a huge difference when the audience of teenagers is predominantly queer themselves. I think the community aspect around fandoms that come together because they can't find that kind of community in their real lives is a good, needed thing and I think from the outside that intensity can look like fetishizing gay men, particularly to people who don't bother to look beyond the surface of 'loud audience, young people, likes those two gay men.' At least for me as a teenager/in my early 20s in the early 00s there was definitely a strong sense of euphoria at discovering fandoms full of other queer people who could be unashamedly excited about things no one else in my life would understand.