Dan & Phil Part 54: Born in the fires of the internet

[Birdie]

There have been „I think they will come out in PINOF“ theories every year since at least 2013, guys. I know everyone is hopeful but I don’t see it happening. Like, I’ve been here for a long time now and people are always sure they’re about to come out at this time of year, always around PINOF. I don’t know why that is but it happens every year. If they are together, I don’t see them ever disclosing this fact to us to be honest. The thing is, they can be happily together without the internet ever knowing about it. They can even settle down without the internet knowing about it. They’ve already established they’re going to move together again without having to come out as a couple. Thing is we only see a very small part of their lives. Most of the time we have no idea what they’re doing and I think that’s a good thing. It does give them the opportunity to have a normal life outside of internet fame and maybe to be together in peace without the internet knowing about it – if they are together.

Also we honestly have no clue what coming out would mean for them. Yes, it would probably give them more freedom in the famous-youtube-creators world and most of their fans and fellow creators would be happy for them but they have private lives. We don’t know their families, their friends, the people important to them at all well. If they’re together, there could be a dozen reasons why they don’t want to make it public. It might not even be about us. But if they tell the internet, literally everyone could find out. And we just don’t know what that would mean to them. (Or maybe the reason they won't come out is because they're not together, no matter how many traditional couple things they do together. Just saying, I still think it's possible.)

(This is exactly why I think Phil doesn’t like to talk about sexuality and stuff as much as Dan does by the way. I don’t think it’s about the fans. If we’re right and he’s not straight, I think it’s way more likely it’s someone in his private life he doesn’t want to know. But this is just speculation and I personally don’t want to take it any further because it’s called a private life for a reason. Maybe he just doesn't like to talk about personal stuff on the internet, I would understand that too.)

Even if you assume that coming out would take one kind of pressure off them, it would invite an even darker kind of scrutiny. Instead of "omg did you see that, did you see how dan looked at him, it totally means they're together" it would be "oh my god did you see that, did you see how dan talked to them, I think they're breaking up."

This is honestly such a good point! Also let’s be real, if they confirmed they’re together, speculation about their love life would go through the roof because everyone would feel validated in their beliefs because of their coming out. This happened whith C&T on a smaller scale too. It would be ugly.

(Oh yay, my stupid opinions are at the top of the page, great.)

[alch]

Every time the idea of them making their relationship public comes around I always wonder what their management thinks about this. Like (assuming they are in a relationship) do Marianne & co. think that it would be a good idea for them to at some point announce they're together or just forever stay in this limbo of everyone thinking they're together but never confirming it?

[sugar]

this has probably been discussed before but i'm actually curious, for those of you that don't believe dan and phil are in a relationship, is there anything they could do short of announcing it very explicitly that would change your mind? would them moving together for a 4th time and buying a home together change your mind or would you still see them as purely platonic despite that type of long-term commitment?

[sorryimnotclever]

I had this thought the other day while tossing and for five hours of Dan coming out in a really subtle way. Kind of like he did with the "fuck nazis" sign in the background, just blurry enough to make out, but not quite making a big focus of it. Maybe after a couple videos of putting really serious things on there so that no one can possibly take it as a joke, and then never addressing it after that.

I know it probably won't happen, I just need to take my mind off of things for a while, so I thought I'd share

[autumnhearth]

AmazingSlime: i LOVED this video. watched it when i got home from the fair last night and i was pretty intoxicated so when i woke up this morning i was sure i had imagined how...not exactly PG some of his comments were. i rewatched as soon as i woke up and i was so pleasantly surprised that it wasn't just a dream. the video was so, so enjoyable and definitely one of my favorite AP videos. i'm really here for anything where they just drop their personas and seem to be having a good time. the comments on drugs and unicorn bodily fluids seemed...a bit out of character for his innocent PG AP persona, which i know has been mentioned. but what i find most interesting is that this comes in as his first video since the talk with sue perkins, in which he said that he's "quite a PG channel'. i'm just curious about this and find it interesting that he said that so explicitly and then went on to make a video that...might contradict that in a way. on another hand i wonder if this was just his way of contracting the inherently "childish" nature of a slime video. i wonder if maybe it was deliberate to include those things to make it clear that he is still a 30 year old man, regardless of his content. anyone else have any thoughts or insight on this?

Yes! I thought about the relation to the Sue Perkins chat as well. Didn't they actually mention something about Phil talking about drugs being part of his potential future break down/end of YouTube/Dark!Phil? Or am I imagining that? I should probably rewatch and/or find timestamps.

I haven't said it anywhere for fear of backlash, but I feel like I'm the only one not over the moon about the cocaine/drugs joke. It was funny, it was fine, that is what the little white baggy calls to mind, but like... I feel like everyone else is screaming "yes!" and praising him for it, while I'm like "okay then, I guess that's one AP vid I won't be showing my son" (which is unfortunate because the slime is cool). I'm not upset, I don't feel betrayed by Phil (like he mentioned to Sue with the swearing). I know I'm responsible for screening the content for my kid, which thankfully I did. Also, parenthood aside, drug mentions in general make me squeamish, so scrolling through Tumblr and seeing that moment gifed and reblogged by everyone, ugh. Ah well.

awsugar I find it super amusing that your signature has the "I'll touch you when I please" gif, and you were talking about them being able to keep their hands to themselves.

[rizzo]

I haven't said it anywhere for fear of backlash, but I feel like I'm the only one not over the moon about the cocaine/drugs joke. It was funny, it was fine, that is what the little white baggy calls to mind, but like... I feel like everyone else is screaming "yes!" and praising him for it, while I'm like "okay then, I guess that's one AP vid I won't be showing my son" (which is unfortunate because the slime is cool). I'm not upset, I don't feel betrayed by Phil (like he mentioned to Sue with the swearing). I know I'm responsible for screening the content for my kid, which thankfully I did. Also, parenthood aside, drug mentions in general make me squeamish, so scrolling through Tumblr and seeing that moment gifed and reblogged by everyone, ugh. Ah well.

I totally see where you're coming from! I can't speak for everyone, but I think part of why I celebrated that drug reference was moreso the fact that there was a drug reference and not so much the joke itself. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it was the funniest or most interesting mention and, in the context of the video, I'd go so far as to say it was unnecessary. But that in itself makes me feel like Phil was specifically trying to make an adult joke and that's what's exciting.

I think he's testing the waters with the whole "acting his age"/being more himself thing and that's honestly all I can ask for. So while the joke was a bit , I'm totally here for it.

[sugar]

I haven't said it anywhere for fear of backlash, but I feel like I'm the only one not over the moon about the cocaine/drugs joke. It was funny, it was fine, that is what the little white baggy calls to mind, but like... I feel like everyone else is screaming "yes!" and praising him for it, while I'm like "okay then, I guess that's one AP vid I won't be showing my son" (which is unfortunate because the slime is cool). I'm not upset, I don't feel betrayed by Phil (like he mentioned to Sue with the swearing). I know I'm responsible for screening the content for my kid, which thankfully I did. Also, parenthood aside, drug mentions in general make me squeamish, so scrolling through Tumblr and seeing that moment gifed and reblogged by everyone, ugh. Ah well.

I totally see where you're coming from! I can't speak for everyone, but I think part of why I celebrated that drug reference was moreso the fact that there was a drug reference and not so much the joke itself. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it was the funniest or most interesting mention and, in the context of the video, I'd go so far as to say it was unnecessary. But that in itself makes me feel like Phil was specifically trying to make an adult joke and that's what's exciting.

I think he's testing the waters with the whole "acting his age"/being more himself thing and that's honestly all I can ask for. So while the joke was a bit , I'm totally here for it.

yes, what rizzo said!

it's not as if i've been waiting for the day that phil talks about drugs on his main channel and my day has finally come. it's not even him making a joke about drugs specifically, it's just him making a joke or comment that's a bit more adult a furthers him from the 'innocent childlike angel bean phil' narrative that excites me.

i can absolutely see how, if you're a parent who watches deppy with your children, you'd get something else out of that and react in a different way.

also, for me, a lot of people i know are really like...shocked and embarassed by the fact that i started watching dan and phil this year and have become so obsessed. and the reasoning is usually that they're supposedly for a younger audience, so whenever i see them make a comment in a video that i know isn't aimed at a younger demographic i feel a bit validated.

[lefthandedism]

Yes! I thought about the relation to the Sue Perkins chat as well. Didn't they actually mention something about Phil talking about drugs being part of his potential future break down/end of YouTube/Dark!Phil? Or am I imagining that? I should probably rewatch and/or find timestamps.

Yes they did--and I just finally watched the whole interview through, so I can tell you.

Starting at about 12:16, Phil says that he's not going to start swearing or stealing things in his videos. As the three of them laugh about it, at about 12:30 Phil says "dark!Phil", which Sue like a lot. At about 12:40, Phil says when people write and say they like to share his videos with their kids, he feels obliged not to swear, and then it's Dan who says that Phil must then feel compelled not to take loads of drugs, and Phil agrees that the audience would feel betrayed.

The timing is kind of interesting. Phil tweeted about maybe making a slime video a few days after the interview--and presumably made the video a few days after that. So maybe the discussion prompted him to make a drugs joke. Or who knows: could he have filmed the video before the interview and Dan was actually shading him for a joke he'd already made?

[papierklemmen]

k i don't get the excitement around the cocaine joke if only because phil has already made one in a 2015 baking video. or was it not edgy enough? how is this one different, because this one is on his channel? ehh...

5:24

[flarequake]

It's possible he forgot he'd said that in the interview, what with all the nerves, though you'd think he'd remember what he said and that a joke like that was on his "nope" list anyway.

[archived]

this has probably been discussed before but i'm actually curious, for those of you that don't believe dan and phil are in a relationship, is there anything they could do short of announcing it very explicitly that would change your mind? would them moving together for a 4th time and buying a home together change your mind or would you still see them as purely platonic despite that type of long-term commitment?

I'm kind of neutral but I probably lean quite a bit to the 'they are not in a relationship' side (I do believe they have probably harboured some feelings for eachother at some point in the past/present however). Moving into an actual house would probably push me towards changing my mind because it is a more permanent residence or if they did at any point get a dog because again there would have to be a long-term commitment but even then that doesn't confirm they are in a relationship. Honestly, they could just be content with each other's company and not actively searching for a relationship because they have there 'soulmate', even if it is purely platonic.

So basically, there are things they could do that would make me question but nothing that they could do that would completely push me to believing.

[relatablemood]

In all seriousness, they probably are moving right now to the forever home. After all, the current house has been pretty much emptied in order to accommodate Phil's drug business. You know, a bit of weed growing in the plant pots, cocaine in lines on the windowsills. You guys were onto something with the cocaine jokes

EDIT: sparkle's also my boo now for the good ass theories and being controversial on this site like meme but I was too tired to type that out so I just said ily so they wouldnt feel bad about debating with others

[Birdie]

this has probably been discussed before but i'm actually curious, for those of you that don't believe dan and phil are in a relationship, is there anything they could do short of announcing it very explicitly that would change your mind? would them moving together for a 4th time and buying a home together change your mind or would you still see them as purely platonic despite that type of long-term commitment?

I thought about this for a bit and I came to the conclusion that my unwillingness to believe they're together is connected to how uncomfortable I feel labeling peoples' behaviour couply or romantic or anything without any kind of confirmation. Them moving into a forever home together will probably make me believe they're together but at the same time I feel weird about just assuming two people are romantically together just because they choose to live together. Idk, I don't react well to that kind of stuff. I'm kind of on the aromantic spectrum I think and I would personally love to have a best friend to live with without any romantic strings attached so that's where I'm coming from. (Queer platonic relationships are super interesting to me because I want one really badly, lol.) It's not socially accepted but that doesn't mean people don't do it. BUT I know that's me and most people think differently, deppy probably included. But to be honest, their relationship is special, whether they're friends or a couple, so I don't think we can just apply "friends usually don't do that" to them because they're not normal friends, no matter what.

So that's why I'm on the fence. On one hand, yes, them moving into a house together might change my mind about them. On the other hand, no, I don't necessarily think it would be weird for really good friends with the kind of unique bond deppy have to keep living together without any romantic relationship involved. (My answer is basically a longer version of the shrug emoji which I miss dearly. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

[citizen_erased]

this has probably been discussed before but i'm actually curious, for those of you that don't believe dan and phil are in a relationship, is there anything they could do short of announcing it very explicitly that would change your mind? would them moving together for a 4th time and buying a home together change your mind or would you still see them as purely platonic despite that type of long-term commitment?

I thought about this for a bit and I came to the conclusion that my unwillingness to believe they're together is connected to how uncomfortable I feel labeling peoples' behaviour couply or romantic or anything without any kind of confirmation. Them moving into a forever home together will probably make me believe they're together but at the same time I feel weird about just assuming two people are romantically together just because they choose to live together. Idk, I don't react well to that kind of stuff. I'm kind of on the aromantic spectrum I think and I would personally love to have a best friend to live with without any romantic strings attached so that's where I'm coming from. (Queer platonic relationships are super interesting to me because I want one really badly, lol.) It's not socially accepted but that doesn't mean people don't do it. BUT I know that's me and most people think differently, deppy probably included. But to be honest, their relationship is special, whether they're friends or a couple, so I don't think we can just apply "friends usually don't do that" to them because they're not normal friends, no matter what.

So that's why I'm on the fence. On one hand, yes, them moving into a house together might change my mind about them. On the other hand, no, I don't necessarily think it would be weird for really good friends with the kind of unique bond deppy have to keep living together without any romantic relationship involved. (My answer is basically a longer version of the shrug emoji which I miss dearly. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

First of all, I agree with everything Katka said. I also think that their friendship is so outside of the 'regular norm' that we can't apply the 'normal rules' to them. I'm also reminded of a thing we used to say in university: "you're not best friends until people think you're a couple". The boundaries between platonic & romantic relationships can be incredibly vague, on top of relationships being different for/with everyone. People think my bestie and I are together all the time, and we're not even very touchy/huggy.

Asides from all that, my mother is an avid watcher of those house-buying programs, so I see them a lot as well just by going into the same room. I noticed that especially when people look for homes in/around London there seem to be quite a lot of friends buying houses together. With the house prices and the super fast market there, it's not that weird or surprising for friends to buy together, especially if you already know you live together well and that it saves both of you a lot of money and trouble.

So basically, tl;dr: outside of very blatant confirmation with no subtext whatsoever, I'm more on the side of "queer platonic friendship" than "actual relationship" for D&P. Most of the time, at least (I have my moments of weakness ok)

[sparkle]

I haven't said it anywhere for fear of backlash, but I feel like I'm the only one not over the moon about the cocaine/drugs joke. It was funny, it was fine, that is what the little white baggy calls to mind, but like... I feel like everyone else is screaming "yes!" and praising him for it, while I'm like "okay then, I guess that's one AP vid I won't be showing my son" (which is unfortunate because the slime is cool). I'm not upset, I don't feel betrayed by Phil (like he mentioned to Sue with the swearing). I know I'm responsible for screening the content for my kid, which thankfully I did. Also, parenthood aside, drug mentions in general make me squeamish, so scrolling through Tumblr and seeing that moment gifed and reblogged by everyone, ugh. Ah well.

I kinda agree with you on this, when I heard that Phil was planning to do Slime I was going to show my girlfriends cousin (She's 11, is forever facetiming us while she makes slime, loves YouTube, I know she'd love Phil, she's awesome - I'm lowkey planning on taking her to sitc when I can afford it) buuuut that joke has made me reconsider. But the 22-year-old in me who doesn't care about kid appropriate content because its normally not relevant to me is like . (Especially because I sometimes feel 'too old' for them...)

In all seriousness, they probably are moving right now to the forever home. After all, the current house has been pretty much emptied in order to accommodate Phil's drug business. You know, a bit of weed growing in the plant pots, cocaine in lines on the windowsills. You guys were onto something with the cocaine jokes

EDIT: sparkle's also my boo now for the good ass theories and being controversial on this site like meme but I was too tired to type that out so I just said ily so they wouldnt feel bad about debating with others

WHERE IS THE ILLUMINATI EMOJI WHEN WE NEED IT (also you reminded me that my mum has a plant growing in the garden that I know is a Japanese Maple but it genuinely looks like she's growing weed)

also thank you I feel honoured - I try

[MythicalPinkTrashCan]

I haven't said it anywhere for fear of backlash, but I feel like I'm the only one not over the moon about the cocaine/drugs joke. It was funny, it was fine, that is what the little white baggy calls to mind, but like... I feel like everyone else is screaming "yes!" and praising him for it, while I'm like "okay then, I guess that's one AP vid I won't be showing my son" (which is unfortunate because the slime is cool). I'm not upset, I don't feel betrayed by Phil (like he mentioned to Sue with the swearing). I know I'm responsible for screening the content for my kid, which thankfully I did. Also, parenthood aside, drug mentions in general make me squeamish, so scrolling through Tumblr and seeing that moment gifed and reblogged by everyone, ugh. Ah well.

I kinda agree with you on this, when I heard that Phil was planning to do Slime I was going to show my girlfriends cousin (She's 11, is forever facetiming us while she makes slime, loves YouTube, I know she'd love Phil, she's awesome - I'm lowkey planning on taking her to sitc when I can afford it) buuuut that joke has made me reconsider. But the 22-year-old in me who doesn't care about kid appropriate content because its normally not relevant to me is like . (Especially because I sometimes feel 'too old' for them...)

I let my 7 year old watch it with no hesitation. She doesn't know what cocaine is, and if/when she does, she's old enough to handle an obvious silly joke about it too. Same with sex. We aren't going to watch hardcore porn or anything, but she knows what sex is, she knows it's something adults do when married/want to make a baby.

I'm not judging parenting choices, but it's hardly like he started snorting the glow dust, pretending to shoot it between his toes. It's all about context. I'd rather her see these things with me and it opens conversations than get her info from friends on the playground like I did.

[rizzo]

this has probably been discussed before but i'm actually curious, for those of you that don't believe dan and phil are in a relationship, is there anything they could do short of announcing it very explicitly that would change your mind? would them moving together for a 4th time and buying a home together change your mind or would you still see them as purely platonic despite that type of long-term commitment?

I thought about this for a bit and I came to the conclusion that my unwillingness to believe they're together is connected to how uncomfortable I feel labeling peoples' behaviour couply or romantic or anything without any kind of confirmation. Them moving into a forever home together will probably make me believe they're together but at the same time I feel weird about just assuming two people are romantically together just because they choose to live together. Idk, I don't react well to that kind of stuff. I'm kind of on the aromantic spectrum I think and I would personally love to have a best friend to live with without any romantic strings attached so that's where I'm coming from. (Queer platonic relationships are super interesting to me because I want one really badly, lol.) It's not socially accepted but that doesn't mean people don't do it. BUT I know that's me and most people think differently, deppy probably included. But to be honest, their relationship is special, whether they're friends or a couple, so I don't think we can just apply "friends usually don't do that" to them because they're not normal friends, no matter what.

So that's why I'm on the fence. On one hand, yes, them moving into a house together might change my mind about them. On the other hand, no, I don't necessarily think it would be weird for really good friends with the kind of unique bond deppy have to keep living together without any romantic relationship involved. (My answer is basically a longer version of the shrug emoji which I miss dearly. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

This conversation comes around every few months and I hesitate to start it now, but I'd just like to offer up the fact that Dan and Phil living together isn't even in the top 10 reasons most people think they're together? Nor is their current behavior towards one another.

There are years of screenshots and dates and information and tweets (and even a leaked love "letter") to support the likelihood of a romantic relationship. It's not a theory made up of long glances and multiple rentals.

I just... I wanted to put that out there, because sometimes I feel like that really gets lost in these conversations. Nobody thinks Dan and Phil are together because they decided to rent a 3rd place. I'd be married by now if that's how life worked.

[bluntedclaws]

I haven't said it anywhere for fear of backlash, but I feel like I'm the only one not over the moon about the cocaine/drugs joke. It was funny, it was fine, that is what the little white baggy calls to mind, but like... I feel like everyone else is screaming "yes!" and praising him for it, while I'm like "okay then, I guess that's one AP vid I won't be showing my son" (which is unfortunate because the slime is cool). I'm not upset, I don't feel betrayed by Phil (like he mentioned to Sue with the swearing). I know I'm responsible for screening the content for my kid, which thankfully I did. Also, parenthood aside, drug mentions in general make me squeamish, so scrolling through Tumblr and seeing that moment gifed and reblogged by everyone, ugh. Ah well.

I kinda agree with you on this, when I heard that Phil was planning to do Slime I was going to show my girlfriends cousin (She's 11, is forever facetiming us while she makes slime, loves YouTube, I know she'd love Phil, she's awesome - I'm lowkey planning on taking her to sitc when I can afford it) buuuut that joke has made me reconsider. But the 22-year-old in me who doesn't care about kid appropriate content because its normally not relevant to me is like . (Especially because I sometimes feel 'too old' for them...)

I let my 7 year old watch it with no hesitation. She doesn't know what cocaine is, and if/when she does, she's old enough to handle an obvious silly joke about it too. Same with sex. We aren't going to watch hardcore porn or anything, but she knows what sex is, she knows it's something adults do when married/want to make a baby.

I'm not judging parenting choices, but it's hardly like he started snorting the glow dust, pretending to shoot it between his toes. It's all about context. I'd rather her see these things with me and it opens conversations than get her info from friends on the playground like I did.

Same. I watched it with my kids. My son laughed and my daughter looked slightly confused and asked what cocaine was so I told her it was an illegal bad drug. I didn't bother to explain that phil was joking as it seemed obvious. He had already said that it was glow powder. Anyway, we all loved the video.

I haven't posted in a while so sorry it's late but I would like to add my thanks to the admins for all your recent hard work. The site looks great!

[alittledizzy]

I can't jump in fully so I'm gonna veer around this current topic except to say I think it's actually pretty significant that the convo we now cycle almost monthly through isn't 'I don't think they're a couple, and they'll probably get other partners soon' anymore but instead 'I don't think they're a couple, but I think they're committed to each other and I don't expect that to change.'

(Also super not buying that they would get a house together for convenience, millionaires who don't consider themselves life partners don't need to buy a house together and it would in fact be more convenient and easier for them to get smaller places alone than have to try and find a place to accommodate all the combined rooms they need. The only way that argument works is if they already both had their own places and then got a second one together, like Grace Helbig and Mamrie Hart,)

(Also also, what @rizzo said.)

[goingbackto505]

this has probably been discussed before but i'm actually curious, for those of you that don't believe dan and phil are in a relationship, is there anything they could do short of announcing it very explicitly that would change your mind? would them moving together for a 4th time and buying a home together change your mind or would you still see them as purely platonic despite that type of long-term commitment?

I thought about this for a bit and I came to the conclusion that my unwillingness to believe they're together is connected to how uncomfortable I feel labeling peoples' behaviour couply or romantic or anything without any kind of confirmation. Them moving into a forever home together will probably make me believe they're together but at the same time I feel weird about just assuming two people are romantically together just because they choose to live together. Idk, I don't react well to that kind of stuff. I'm kind of on the aromantic spectrum I think and I would personally love to have a best friend to live with without any romantic strings attached so that's where I'm coming from. (Queer platonic relationships are super interesting to me because I want one really badly, lol.) It's not socially accepted but that doesn't mean people don't do it. BUT I know that's me and most people think differently, deppy probably included. But to be honest, their relationship is special, whether they're friends or a couple, so I don't think we can just apply "friends usually don't do that" to them because they're not normal friends, no matter what.

So that's why I'm on the fence. On one hand, yes, them moving into a house together might change my mind about them. On the other hand, no, I don't necessarily think it would be weird for really good friends with the kind of unique bond deppy have to keep living together without any romantic relationship involved. (My answer is basically a longer version of the shrug emoji which I miss dearly. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

basically, I totally agree with Katka's post. when I first started watching Deppy, the thought of them being a romantic couple didn't even occur to me. they didn't do anything that would suggest they're in love and the status of their relationship to me wasn't the main focus of their videos. I still don't think they want people to focus on that and only that. only after watching the first couple of pinofs and reading the comments under their videos did I stumble upon all the "phan proof", the old tweets, formspring answers, dailybooth, and voldy (still wish I'd never found out about the latter). both Dan and Phil denied the possibility of them ever being in a romantic relationship with each other numerous times and still haven't gone back on any of those statements and continue to insist they're just friends and I just want to respect it. so unless they actually post some sort of confirmation (an instagram picture/caption à la Shane and Ryland, or something like that idk), I'm just not comfortable with assuming anything beyond what they themselves want us to think and see them as. and yeah, I suppose if they do buy a house together and all the 'forever home' talk isn't just an offhand comment, I might reconsider my view on them. all in all, I don't actually need a confirmation from them, if they're together - good for them, we aren't entitled to know. + this post is something I personally agree with:

[alittledizzy]

this post is something I personally agree with:

This topic is so tricky, because I do also agree with that post! But I also don't agree with invalidating m/m sexual or romantic relationships just to fit a projection someone else prefers more. (I'm not saying that this happens with Dan and Phil, just that in general that mentality - like most - can be a slippery slope and one that people who are uncomfortable with homoromantic or homosexual relationships uses a lot.)

I think respecting what they said in terms of relationship is a very valid decision; personally I don't feel any guilt talking about that facet of them, but I do so understanding what they try to project and being sympathetic/empathetic to why. I can separate that, and my own entitlement or what I feel like they're obligated to tell me (which is nothing) from my critical thought/observation about them and the context of them (that envelopes things they don't talk about but that undeniably exist/happened) and what I actually believe the nature of their relationship to be.

But I also hope it doesn't hit a point where they transition their relationship into something obvious the same way they have their sexualities, and people still cling to 6+ year old declarations as truth just out of spite or unwillingness to adapt their viewpoints. If it ever hits that point, I think that'll make me pretty sad.

[Birdie]

this has probably been discussed before but i'm actually curious, for those of you that don't believe dan and phil are in a relationship, is there anything they could do short of announcing it very explicitly that would change your mind? would them moving together for a 4th time and buying a home together change your mind or would you still see them as purely platonic despite that type of long-term commitment?

I thought about this for a bit and I came to the conclusion that my unwillingness to believe they're together is connected to how uncomfortable I feel labeling peoples' behaviour couply or romantic or anything without any kind of confirmation. Them moving into a forever home together will probably make me believe they're together but at the same time I feel weird about just assuming two people are romantically together just because they choose to live together. Idk, I don't react well to that kind of stuff. I'm kind of on the aromantic spectrum I think and I would personally love to have a best friend to live with without any romantic strings attached so that's where I'm coming from. (Queer platonic relationships are super interesting to me because I want one really badly, lol.) It's not socially accepted but that doesn't mean people don't do it. BUT I know that's me and most people think differently, deppy probably included. But to be honest, their relationship is special, whether they're friends or a couple, so I don't think we can just apply "friends usually don't do that" to them because they're not normal friends, no matter what.

So that's why I'm on the fence. On one hand, yes, them moving into a house together might change my mind about them. On the other hand, no, I don't necessarily think it would be weird for really good friends with the kind of unique bond deppy have to keep living together without any romantic relationship involved. (My answer is basically a longer version of the shrug emoji which I miss dearly. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯)

This conversation comes around every few months and I hesitate to start it now, but I'd just like to offer up the fact that Dan and Phil living together isn't even in the top 10 reasons most people think they're together? Nor is their current behavior towards one another.

There are years of screenshots and dates and information and tweets (and even a leaked love "letter") to support the likelihood of a romantic relationship. It's not a theory made up of long glances and multiple rentals.

I just... I wanted to put that out there, because sometimes I feel like that really gets lost in these conversations. Nobody thinks Dan and Phil are together because they decided to rent a 3rd place. I'd be married by now if that's how life worked.

I know! I used their living situation as an example because awsugar did in their original question but I think what I said goes for a lot of other arguments too. I also think it's likely they're together based on some of the information I've seen. But I think it's also likely that they are not - based on other stuff I've seen. I think the point I was trying to make is just that their relationship is very special and can't really be compared to what other friends or couples do or or don't do, so basically "Friends don't act like that!" is not really an argument but neither is "Couples don't act like that!" That discussion about what all the background information means is a can of worms I'd also like to keep unopened for now but I've seen all the stuff and I know that people thinking they're together aren't mindless shippers. I know where you guys are coming from and I don't think it's a farfetched theory at all.

But I also hope it doesn't hit a point where they transition their relationship into something obvious the same way they have their sexualities, and people still cling to 6+ year old declarations as truth just out of spite or unwillingness to adapt their viewpoints. If it ever hits that point, I think that'll make me pretty sad.

Agreed. I think right now both interpretations are possible for different reasons. I might be leaning towards them not being together more but if it should become obvious, I'd love to be proven wrong and I'll be side-eyeing everyone who tries to invalidate their relationship. It's one thing to not believe two people are a couple when it's not confirmed but it's a different story to invalidate someone's confirmed relationship, especially when it's an lgbtq one. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

[goingbackto505]

This topic is so tricky, because I do also agree with that post! But I also don't agree with invalidating m/m sexual or romantic relationships just to fit a projection someone else prefers more. (I'm not saying that this happens with Dan and Phil, just that in general that mentality - like most - can be a slippery slope and one that people who are uncomfortable with homoromantic or homosexual relationships uses a lot.)

to be honest the only reason I apply that post to Dan and Phil is because of what they themselves said, and like I've mentioned before, the way they (especially Dan lately) make a clear emphasis on the word "friend"/"friendship" when talking about each other. sometimes Dan says it without it necessarily needing to be mentioned. personally I don't want to over-analyze everything they do and say to the point where everything is hints and clues, because I don't want to think they're constantly playing a "game" with their fandom. it's also hard for me to imagine that they'd want people to try to find the "proof" or over-analyze their personal life to the extent where it's kinda absurd, regardless of their relationship status. not everything has to be a conspiracy, even Dan shaded those in their gaming stream lol. don't get me wrong, I'm not judging anyone who harmlessly discusses Dan and Phil's life and what they themselves put up online, but I mean, from what we all can tell, they're very private people and they seem to be comfortable in their privacy. Dan said he's fine with fanfiction and fanart, but the thing he's not okay with is people starting rumors and mixing fiction with reality. I realize that he said that 5/4 years ago, but still, apparently the statement still stands? I head Dan denied phan in 2015 (which I know doesn't at all exclude the possibility of him not wanting/not feeling comfortable with revealing the truth to some random person, but anyway). I'd also like to mention that I'm never 100% certain and can never come to a clear conclusion when I think of whatever those two have together, it's just I'm totally okay with both the romantic and platonic "versions", they're not my "otp" and I don't think about "endgame". ultimately, I just want them to be happy, and of course I'd be more than happy if it turns out they're more than just friends. and I really hope the rest of their audience would agree on this one, eventually.

[dailybooth]

personally I don't want to over-analyze everything they do and say to the point where everything is hints and clues, because I don't want to think they're constantly playing a "game" with their fandom. it's also hard for me to imagine that they'd want people to try to find the "proof" or over-analyze their personal life to the extent where it's kinda absurd, regardless of their relationship status. not everything has to be a conspiracy, even Dan shaded those in their gaming stream lol. don't get me wrong, I'm not judging anyone who harmlessly discusses Dan and Phil's life and what they themselves put up online, but I mean, from what we all can tell, they're very private people and they seem to be comfortable in their privacy. Dan said he's fine with fanfiction and fanart, but the thing he's not okay with is people starting rumors and mixing fiction with reality. I realize that he said that 5/4 years ago, but still, apparently the statement still stands? I head Dan denied phan in 2015 (which I know doesn't at all exclude the possibility of him not wanting/not feeling comfortable with revealing the truth to some random person, but anyway). I'd also like to mention that I'm never 100% certain and can never come to a clear conclusion when I think of whatever those two have together, it's just I'm totally okay with both the romantic and platonic "versions", they're not my "otp" and I don't think about "endgame". ultimately, I just want them to be happy, and of course I'd be more than happy if it turns out they're more than just friends. and I really hope the rest of their audience would agree on this one, eventually.

I just wanted to say that I 100% agree with the boldled parts, even tho I definitely lean towards them being together.

[Offtopic]I had a dream last night that deppy moved back into the old London apartment.
Something about having to move out and let someone else rent it for a while so they could then actually BUY it. It was a sweet dream, cause I really do miss the old apartment. But it also made me laugh bc I have a feeling Dil and Pickle would rather pull out their hair than move back to that place [/Offtopic]

[lurker]

about the topic of phil making more "adult" jokes, but not necessarily about the last video: i feel like phil could pull off that sort of humour that's still safe to watch for children while being ridiculous to adults. like, the sort that makes you double take when you rewatch it after having grown up. maybe he'll venture into that direction, who knows.

[Offtopic]i distinctly remember someone here saying they have the same hair structure as dan and want to give him hair care tips. if they're still here, care to hit me up with those tips instead? :shifty:[/Offtopic]