IDB

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 12:29 am**

sapienveneficus wrote:
queerofcups wrote:Speaking of other queer shit! Dan's latest reblogs have left me with a question. Where's the tipping point, in the posts he reblogs or the jokes or references about his own attraction that he makes--when are we like ok, yeah, that's a queer dude. Or at least a not-straight dude. Because the shit he's just reblogged would look right at home on my own queer af tumblr, and feel much like in-community jokes to me. But I'm biased.

So is there anything he can do short of being like "I, Daniel Howell am [insert non-straight identity here]" that would confirm that he's not, in fact, straight?
This is something I wonder about as well. As someone who made the leap from casual fan to the more active, IDB reading variety of fan this year, I no longer read Dan as straight. But, before making that leap, I honestly wasn't sure. I think a lot of casual fans are probably in a similar boat, especially if they've been around for awhile. A big reason might be simply that Dan's only ever spoken about dating girls on his channel. Yes, he's made mentions of male attraction, and those of us who watch liveshows, keep up with his social media posts, and parse his videos for subtext have gotten pretty good at picking up what he's throwing down. But I would imagine that a lot of casual fans aren't getting that. Straight guys saying that other guys are attractive has become more common place, especially in online spaces. I think that explains the popularity of hashtags like mancrushmonday.

So I would wager, for casual fans, that a tipping point would be Dan talking about going on a date with a guy in one of his videos. Content like that wouldn't be abstract or vague and couldn't be interpreted as funny or casual. Now, of course, knowing what I think I know about Dan's views on his own privacy, I doubt he would ever say something so direct. But, in terms of a tipping point for casual fans, I think that would be it.

Agree with this. People who want to can just see the attraction as aesthetic attraction. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but I think Dan and Phil intentionally keep it vague in order to allow the largest potential audience. As soon as you start expressing opinions, your potential audience becomes much smaller. Dan expressing left leaning political views already begins to draw away from any potential right-wing viewers (although their target audience is generally more liberal people).

I mean, I think DnP could literally kiss on camera, and some anti's would still say "Well obviously they're just providing fan service, tricking all you creeps just for views" etc.

Plus, with DnP valuing their privacy as much as they do, I doubt they'd get to that stage - certainly not within the next year, at least.

edit: ayy top of the page again, what convinent posting times i do have.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:34 am**

Susanisnotafish wrote:Thanks Dizzy for the hilariously annotated timestamps. I noticed the lie about having a bbq too. Maybe he wasn't there tho? Maybe it was a Phil only thing. Or maybe duh duh duh PHIL lied? Anyway these came at just the right time as I was about to rewatch the ls.

Yes, much thanks to dizzy and fancybum for the time stamps and mentions. I am curious about the bbq and wonder if perhaps Dan interpreted that term differently than how Phil used it. Dan might not consider Phil grilling on the balcony for his grandparent's visit as "a BBQ" if the food was consumed inside or even on their balcony. He might be thinking more of a big backyard deal or cooking out at a park, hence the "do think I went outside?" comment. Whatever, branding.

sapienveneficus wrote: I think a lot of casual fans are probably in a similar boat, especially if they've been around for awhile. A big reason might be simply that Dan's only ever spoken about dating girls on his channel. Yes, he's made mentions of male attraction, and those of us who watch liveshows, keep up with his social media posts, and parse his videos for subtext have gotten pretty good at picking up what he's throwing down. But I would imagine that a lot of casual fans aren't getting that.

So I would wager, for casual fans, that a tipping point would be Dan talking about going on a date with a guy in one of his videos. Content like that wouldn't be abstract or vague and couldn't be interpreted as funny or casual. Now, of course, knowing what I think I know about Dan's views on his own privacy, I doubt he would ever say something so direct. But, in terms of a tipping point for casual fans, I think that would be it.

Yep. Gay denials from five years ago, plus only mentioning dating girls, while presenting yourself as single would lead many casual fans to believe he's straight. (Though the husband still thinks you would have to be blind or deaf to think that). Especially if they don't watch liveshows, aren't used to looking at subtext or haven't done any research. However I can't see Dan mentioning going on a date with a guy because he probably hasn't besides with Phil as in it doesn't really fit in with what little we know of his dating history. Thus it would have to be fabricated and I can't see him doing that just to prove a point. Similar case for Phil: only mentioning unsuccessfully trying to date girls, one brief (what was it two weeks?) relationship in college where he became friends with the guy she dropped him for and if he did date any guys in college he probably deemed that too personal/adult for a his usual funny childhood centered anecdotes, but his content is changing so maybe there is still hope. But probably not.

I mentioned presenting themselves as single in the past, but in the collab with Cat and his mentions of it in his liveshow last night, I noticed Dan drew attention to the fact that she was single/alone and that the pets were filling a void. And the way in which he said it, sat next to her with Phil on the other side painted a pretty clear picture (to me at least) that while they would love to have a dog, they do not have the same type of void that needs filling. They are not alone, they have each other. And in both of those instances, it seemed he was speaking as someone who is not single. The last time I remember either of them even slightly inferring that they were single was during an episode of My Horse Prince where Dan said I thinks we can all relate with SusanKun lamenting that she's too busy to meet cute guys and even that is just a silly sassy comment. Does anyone recall other recent implications? Methinks they are getting comfortable with fans seeing them as a couple without saying it.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:35 am**

sapienveneficus wrote:
This is something I wonder about as well. As someone who made the leap from casual fan to the more active, IDB reading variety of fan this year, I no longer read Dan as straight. But, before making that leap, I honestly wasn't sure. I think a lot of casual fans are probably in a similar boat, especially if they've been around for awhile. A big reason might be simply that Dan's only ever spoken about dating girls on his channel. Yes, he's made mentions of male attraction, and those of us who watch liveshows, keep up with his social media posts, and parse his videos for subtext have gotten pretty good at picking up what he's throwing down. But I would imagine that a lot of casual fans aren't getting that. Straight guys saying that other guys are attractive has become more common place, especially in online spaces. I think that explains the popularity of hashtags like mancrushmonday.

So I would wager, for casual fans, that a tipping point would be Dan talking about going on a date with a guy in one of his videos. Content like that wouldn't be abstract or vague and couldn't be interpreted as funny or casual. Now, of course, knowing what I think I know about Dan's views on his own privacy, I doubt he would ever say something so direct. But, in terms of a tipping point for casual fans, I think that would be it.

I think this was true until last year. I don't think anyone these days can argue about dan's "not straight" stance since his Diss Track video (8M views!), where he actually directly references his vagueness about it because he himself probably doesn't know.

If you even have a doubt he might be straight as a casual viewer you're either way too blind, bigoted or just delusional.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:45 am**

albion wrote:
sapienveneficus wrote:
This is something I wonder about as well. As someone who made the leap from casual fan to the more active, IDB reading variety of fan this year, I no longer read Dan as straight. But, before making that leap, I honestly wasn't sure. I think a lot of casual fans are probably in a similar boat, especially if they've been around for awhile. A big reason might be simply that Dan's only ever spoken about dating girls on his channel. Yes, he's made mentions of male attraction, and those of us who watch liveshows, keep up with his social media posts, and parse his videos for subtext have gotten pretty good at picking up what he's throwing down. But I would imagine that a lot of casual fans aren't getting that. Straight guys saying that other guys are attractive has become more common place, especially in online spaces. I think that explains the popularity of hashtags like mancrushmonday.

So I would wager, for casual fans, that a tipping point would be Dan talking about going on a date with a guy in one of his videos. Content like that wouldn't be abstract or vague and couldn't be interpreted as funny or casual. Now, of course, knowing what I think I know about Dan's views on his own privacy, I doubt he would ever say something so direct. But, in terms of a tipping point for casual fans, I think that would be it.
I think this was true until last year. I don't think anyone these days can argue about dan's "not straight" stance since his Diss Track video (8M views!), where he actually directly references his vagueness about it because he himself probably doesn't know.

If you even have a doubt he might be straight as a casual viewer you're either way too blind, bigoted or just delusional.

I'd also add things like the mentions of abs and angst in the anime video, the ISG questions where he references Haru/attraction to male fictional characters/expresses sympathy with boy troubles, plus - just to live up to my rank title - Halloween Baking and his general demeanor with Phil.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:11 am**

Agree with this. People who want to can just see the attraction as aesthetic attraction. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but I think Dan and Phil intentionally keep it vague in order to allow the largest potential audience.

I think there are probably multiple reasons for keeping their sexualities vague. Not just audience, but they may not be "out" to family (standard disclaimer: "if" they aren't straight). It would also pretty much "out" their relationship, and as you mentioned, given how highly they value their privacy, I don't think they have any desire to do that.

I mean, I think DnP could literally kiss on camera, and some anti's would still say "Well obviously they're just providing fan service, tricking all you creeps just for views" etc.

Agreed, everyone has a lens or filter they see things through (goggles? LOL) and even in the face of indisputable, irrefutable, and undeniable evidence, people will believe see/hear/believe what they want to like: "Putin didn't interfere with the American election", "Trump respects women", -- but Trumps lies are literally on the news all day, every day, and 38% of people in America still support Trump.

I'm sorry, I digressed, but the whole Trump thing just REALLY makes me angry and it completely defies human comprehension. But you probably get my point: people will believe what they want to believe.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:12 am**

autumnhearth wrote:
I mentioned presenting themselves as single in the past, but in the collab with Cat and his mentions of it in his liveshow last night, I noticed Dan drew attention to the fact that she was single/alone and that the pets were filling a void. And the way in which he said it, sat next to her with Phil on the other side painted a pretty clear picture (to me at least) that while they would love to have a dog, they do not have the same type of void that needs filling. They are not alone, they have each other. And in both of those instances, it seemed he was speaking as someone who is not single. The last time I remember either of them even slightly inferring that they were single was during an episode of My Horse Prince where Dan said I thinks we can all relate with SusanKun lamenting that she's too busy to meet cute guys and even that is just a silly sassy comment. Does anyone recall other recent implications? Methinks they are getting comfortable with fans seeing them as a couple without saying it.

Oh my word! I hadn't thought about those Cat the dog lady comments through that particular lens. I like your interpretation!

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:19 am**

karma_yeah wrote:
Agree with this. People who want to can just see the attraction as aesthetic attraction. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but I think Dan and Phil intentionally keep it vague in order to allow the largest potential audience.
I think there are probably multiple reasons for keeping their sexualities vague. Not just audience, but they may not be "out" to family (standard disclaimer: "if" they aren't straight). It would also pretty much "out" their relationship, and as you mentioned, given how highly they value their privacy, I don't think they have any desire to do that.

I imagine they would be out to their families, at least about their sexualities, right?

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:38 am**

onetruetrash wrote: I imagine they would be out to their families, at least about their sexualities, right?

What makes you think that? I don't feel comfortable speculating about specific family members, but I don't think we know enough at all to assume that. Also, even if they're out to, say, their immediate families, that doesn't necessarily mean they're out to their whole families. I, for one, am out to my parents and brother, because I knew they wouldn't care, but I am not out to any other family, as they are all very religious and conservative, so I don't feel like opening up that can of worms if I don't need to, and I don't see them often anyway. It could be that there are specific family members they don't feel comfortable coming out to. Or not, I have no idea, they could be completely open with all their most distant great aunts for all I know.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:46 am**

BuffyFiona wrote:
onetruetrash wrote: I imagine they would be out to their families, at least about their sexualities, right?
What makes you think that? I don't feel comfortable speculating about specific family members, but I don't think we know enough at all to assume that. Also, even if they're out to, say, their immediate families, that doesn't necessarily mean they're out to their whole families. I, for one, am out to my parents and brother, because I knew they wouldn't care, but I am not out to any other family, as they are all very religious and conservative, so I don't feel like opening up that can of worms if I don't need to, and I don't see them often anyway. It could be that there are specific family members they don't feel comfortable coming out to. Or not, I have no idea, they could be completely open with all their most distant great aunts for all I know.

I meant their immediate family, who both seem pretty accepting as far as I can see, and that seems like the only family they're really close to, so I don't imagine having some unaccepting aunts and uncles would be a big reason to not be out.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:56 am**

onetruetrash wrote: I meant their immediate family, who both seem pretty accepting as far as I can see, and that seems like the only family they're really close to, so I don't imagine having some unaccepting aunts and uncles would be a big reason to not be out.

I mean... families aren't always that cut and dry, though. Coming out can be terrifying even for people who know they have support, plus you can tell yourself stuff like "they have to know by now so what's the point," and never officially put words to it. Which presents its own set of behavior.

I hope that didn't come across as snarky btw! I just really think it's impossible to truly know the nuance of someone else's family and their situation, especially in this context.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:06 am**

neetbuzzer wrote:
onetruetrash wrote: I meant their immediate family, who both seem pretty accepting as far as I can see, and that seems like the only family they're really close to, so I don't imagine having some unaccepting aunts and uncles would be a big reason to not be out.
I mean... families aren't always that cut and dry, though. Coming out can be terrifying even for people who know they have support, plus you can tell yourself stuff like "they have to know by now so what's the point," and never officially put words to it. Which presents its own set of behavior.

I hope that didn't come across as snarky btw! I just really think it's impossible to truly know the nuance of someone else's family and their situation, especially in this context.

Yeah, this was kinda my point, we really can't know what their unique circumstances are and feelings about them. Like I mentioned, personally I'm not out to anyone but immediate fam, and despite the fact that I'm not very close at all to the most homophobic of them, I'm still very anxious about coming out to anyone other than my parents/brother. It just saves everyone trouble if I don't mention it. Just because we're not close doesn't mean we're not still family, and our lives are connected in complex ways. Family dynamics are very intricate and emotional and hard to understand from an outside perspective. So presuming to know what's a good enough reason to be out seems unjustified to me.

Also, we have no idea what family members they might be close to. Especially Dan, who has gone out of his way to protect the privacy of his family.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:07 am**

onetruetrash wrote:
BuffyFiona wrote:
onetruetrash wrote: I imagine they would be out to their families, at least about their sexualities, right?
What makes you think that? I don't feel comfortable speculating about specific family members, but I don't think we know enough at all to assume that. Also, even if they're out to, say, their immediate families, that doesn't necessarily mean they're out to their whole families. I, for one, am out to my parents and brother, because I knew they wouldn't care, but I am not out to any other family, as they are all very religious and conservative, so I don't feel like opening up that can of worms if I don't need to, and I don't see them often anyway. It could be that there are specific family members they don't feel comfortable coming out to. Or not, I have no idea, they could be completely open with all their most distant great aunts for all I know.
I meant their immediate family, who both seem pretty accepting as far as I can see, and that seems like the only family they're really close to, so I don't imagine having some unaccepting aunts and uncles would be a big reason to not be out.

Unless I'm forgetting something big, the intricacies of their family structures have never been very clear to me (aside from the basics, like they each have a mother, father, brother, and grandparents). I remember Dan mentioning (I think in his Draw My Life) that his grandparents attended church, although I'm not sure if that includes the grandmother he's close to, and who watches his videos (and religious beliefs do not automatically denote beliefs on sexuality). I remember Phil mentioning his grandfather's conservative opinions on boys dying their hair in a liveshow, and he's alluded to his father's views on masculinity. Maybe none of it is related; maybe their family isn't the reason they choose to stay lowkey about sexuality and/or relationships. But I don't know if I believe that their families are open and accepting just based off the (extremely) limited knowledge I have.

But anyway, I do lean towards their audience/professional lives being the main reason they choose to stay lowkey, just because it's the part of their lives I see the most of and have the most information to base an opinion on. (And is it weird I feel kind of strange talking about their families myself, but don't feel weird reading others' opinions? Huh.)

I also hope this didn't come across as rude or curt! I love this discussion. I'm just bad at making my posts seem friendly without drowning it in emojis and exclamation points.

(And just to clarify, Phil's immediate family seems lovely and wonderful and amazing, and I love them. )

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:16 am**

You all make very good points. I tend to see families in a very black and white way, but that's probably due to my own experiences.

droopy wrote:(And just to clarify, Phil's immediate family seems lovely and wonderful and amazing, and I love them. )

I know, his family seems great.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:17 am**

When I was a casual viewer, nothing registered to me about anyone on YouTube not being straight except people like Tyler Oakley who'd explicitly come out. As soon as I became a fan I saw squeeing comments about how the guys looked at each other, but I still didn't really think about the guys necessarily not being straight until later.

Late again (house clearout has dominated my brain for two weeks, now gotta put a ton of stuff up for sale and I just want it done, my brain is tired of seeing it all). It had been so long since a liveshow, I forgot Tuesday was Dan's day and had a nap, but woke up halfway through so at least saw the second half of it live and then caught up. It was a nice one, he seemed chill. I figure he wasn't defensive about the jokiness of the meme video since it's been a while, he could just glaze past it if there was anything more originally. Cheeky sticky-fingered git with that emoji pillow, though, honestly. Reminds me of how he keeps throwing things like the mouth thingy and that timtam biscuit when he's onstage, fricking diva

Loved The Sims, Dalien is so cute. I love the special crib and now we know Dil has been wearing space pyjamas. I keep remembering birth in The Sims 2. There were two options on what you saw, either just spinning and catching the baby or a cinematic where the parent stood in wonder as things happened. For a human baby, I can't remember it exactly, but the mother's plumbbob would spring a smaller one and then the baby would land in her arms. For an alien, the father's plumbbob would have a hatch open and the smaller one would float out, then the baby would float down all zenlike sitting in a Buddha pose before floating down into his arms and he'd do a surprised double take before being smitten by the cuteness.

In The Sims 3 you could go to hospital and either way, the baby would be in a pink or blue blanket while in 2 they were just in a diaper. I don't know about alien babies in 3, didn't play it that much. Two of the three scientist brothers in 2 got abducted, though, so you had two alien kids in that family. It was more likely to happen if they stargazed with the expensive telescope. Also the alien kids were green.

Can't remember if I commented on the Mario Kart video, but that was fun. I'm curious whether Phil does help Dan dominate the leaderboard in second place a lot since he kept getting knocked back. A phan prix would be amazing. There are enough people in the phandom, the guys could run that all the time if they wanted to.

Looking forward to the collabs with Anthony and whatever this gaming video contains.

And finally we were blessed with a pancake tweet. Good to know some things never change

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:25 am**

Not to drudge up the worlds cringiest article, but I imagine Dan (and Phil's) views on publicly coming out are unchanged from their Sunday Times interview in late 2015. I think 2017 Dan is much more in a glass closet, but I think the one thing that holds him back now (as it did then) is if he identifies as queer, it really narrows the plausible deniability factor of the nature of their relationship.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:35 am**

Phantasy wrote:Not to drudge up the worlds cringiest article, but I imagine Dan (and Phil's) views on publicly coming out are unchanged from their Sunday Times interview in late 2015. I think 2017 Dan is much more in a glass closet, but I think the one thing that holds him back now (as it did then) is if he identifies as queer, it really narrows the plausible deniability factor of the nature of their relationship.

on the one hand I hate that just putting two potentially sexually compatible people in proximity seems to equal instant naked (just add tension, etc.) because obviously being queer doesn't mean you wanna bang the house down but on the other hand the last several years + having eyes...

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:47 am**

Phantasy wrote:Not to drudge up the worlds cringiest article, but I imagine Dan (and Phil's) views on publicly coming out are unchanged from their Sunday Times interview in late 2015. I think 2017 Dan is much more in a glass closet, but I think the one thing that holds him back now (as it did then) is if he identifies as queer, it really narrows the plausible deniability factor of the nature of their relationship.

vv true.

Re. Coming Out to Family Don't want to make assumptions, but didn't both of their fams see TATINOF in London? Which means they both saw the fanfiction scenes and didn't seem to have any adverse responses.

About Dans Grandma going to Church, is that the same Grandma that likes to travel a lot, that they bought an iPad for, whom Dan generally seems to adore? Because I doubt he'd be so comfortable with her being homophobic.

We don't know enough about their family, so probs shouldn't be commenting based upon assumptions, but once you learn about a relatives ideologies that you morally oppose, you can't really look at them with the same fondness - from what I've experienced.

Also, despite being an atheist and secularist, not all religious people have terrible morals and can't adapt to modern society (I just don't approve of the organisations themselves and their influence over society). Despite all their laws and rules, very few people strictly follow their religious text to the point, most just pick and choose the morals and ethics they approve of and latch onto them. Find two random people from any religion and you might be surprised to see how widely their views differ depending upon what they've chosen to employ as their main ideology.

Dan seemed to have had a positive experience, if his comments about the border agent looking like the sort of woman who "Goes to Church", specifically associating Church with positive traits and features such as "Baking" and "Dogs". Therefore, I doubt his Grandma is homophobic if Dan appears to still associate Church with positivity and joy.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:51 am**

Phantasy wrote:Not to drudge up the worlds cringiest article, but I imagine Dan (and Phil's) views on publicly coming out are unchanged from their Sunday Times interview in late 2015. I think 2017 Dan is much more in a glass closet, but I think the one thing that holds him back now (as it did then) is if he identifies as queer, it really narrows the plausible deniability factor of the nature of their relationship.

I find the part of that article quote about not wanting to be a Kardashian hilarious bc I would think Dan would love to be that close to Kanye!

Also on another tangent I was interested in Dan's response to the 13 yr old who asked if it was weird they'd read smut. I wonder if his reaction is different now that they are raising Dab. Or maybe the ever increasing age difference between him and the ls audience is making him feel weird. I feel like in the past he would have talked about all the smut he saw at a young age and made the person feel like it was ok. But this time he said it probably was weird.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:09 am**

saffarinda wrote:
Phantasy wrote:Not to drudge up the worlds cringiest article, but I imagine Dan (and Phil's) views on publicly coming out are unchanged from their Sunday Times interview in late 2015. I think 2017 Dan is much more in a glass closet, but I think the one thing that holds him back now (as it did then) is if he identifies as queer, it really narrows the plausible deniability factor of the nature of their relationship.
vv true.

Re. Coming Out to Family Don't want to make assumptions, but didn't both of their fams see TATINOF in London? Which means they both saw the fanfiction scenes and didn't seem to have any adverse responses.

About Dans Grandma going to Church, is that the same Grandma that likes to travel a lot, that they bought an iPad for, whom Dan generally seems to adore? Because I doubt he'd be so comfortable with her being homophobic.

We don't know enough about their family, so probs shouldn't be commenting based upon assumptions, but once you learn about a relatives ideologies that you morally oppose, you can't really look at them with the same fondness - from what I've experienced.

Also, despite being an atheist and secularist, not all religious people have terrible morals and can't adapt to modern society (I just don't approve of the organisations themselves and their influence over society). Despite all their laws and rules, very few people strictly follow their religious text to the point, most just pick and choose the morals and ethics they approve of and latch onto them. Find two random people from any religion and you might be surprised to see how widely their views differ depending upon what they've chosen to employ as their main ideology.

Dan seemed to have had a positive experience, if his comments about the border agent looking like the sort of woman who "Goes to Church", specifically associating Church with positive traits and features such as "Baking" and "Dogs". Therefore, I doubt his Grandma is homophobic if Dan appears to still associate Church with positivity and joy.

These are all good points! And not to get too personal, but I can say from experience that having certain religious/spiritual beliefs does not automatically mean the person has certain other beliefs. Like you said, people will believe what resonates with them on a spiritual level, regardless of what opinions others with similar beliefs have. And I feel like it's pretty obvious that Dan adores his grandmother, so no matter what she believes or knows about him, they have a good relationship. (And like, if she watches his videos, then he must be okay with her seeing everything we see, so...)

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 7:46 am**

I think I kinda realised today after reading all of you guys posts about sexuality etc that if Dan and Phil are bisexual or just not straight in general, it must be pretty hard. And I was reading about the fact that they mention things in conversation about male attraction and to take that as a sign (sorry I can't quote the exact things it was many pages ago) but I read that and almost cried. I'll put thoughts under spoiler.

Sorry for the ramble but I just found similiarities in how Dan and Phil drop little 'hints' and mention attraction because I do the same, and I obviously can't speak for how they feel and I definitely can't label them. What ever they chose to call themselves, if they even do, I bet having millions of people every day following you as an audience is scary enough, I wouldn't blame them if they didn't want to come out just yet. But the dropping hints/mentioning attraction might be a big thing for them, and might be easier than a clean-cut 'I like ___ and I am ____'. It was and still is for me. But again I can't speak for them, this is just experience as being still kind of in the closet. This probably doesn't make sense, I'm sorry.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 9:27 am**

lishachi wrote:I think I kinda realised today after reading all of you guys posts about sexuality etc that if Dan and Phil are bisexual or just not straight in general, it must be pretty hard. And I was reading about the fact that they mention things in conversation about male attraction and to take that as a sign (sorry I can't quote the exact things it was many pages ago) but I read that and almost cried. I'll put thoughts under spoiler.
It's so similar to what I do and I didn't realise it until I read what you guys were saying. I do the exact same, I'm only 'out' (still not sure if I like the whole label aspect) to my really close friends and a couple of others. I would probably have a heart attack if my family and parents knew and I am way, way too scared to tell them. But sometimes I will say something about girls aswell as guys that hints at my attraction to both, and I did that to my friends before I came out too. And it's nerve-wracking enough even dropping hints, I find. I remember telling my friend that I thought this girl was cute, and my heart was racing and I was so scared of the reaction. Of course she was fine with it and actually said the same, but leaving yourself vulnerable and open to people about who you really are is terrifying. I guess I'm still closeted? Is that the right term? I don't know. I'm still trying to figure everything out and if I even like labels at the minute, but it's a whirlwind of confusion. It's also scary as all hell because some people don't agree with it, I'm pretty sure some of my family wouldn't like it, and of course I'm scared if I even date another girl that people will give us strange looks in public, the last girl I dated I had a few looks from people while just holding her hand. It was hard. So anyway, I empathise with deppy, because if they are bisexual/pansexual/find attraction to more than just one gender then they are probably scared too. And they have an audience that is accepting, yes, and LGBTQ+ is more accepted now than ever BUT there are still people who think it is wrong and don't agree and it's really sad.
Sorry for the ramble but I just found similiarities in how Dan and Phil drop little 'hints' and mention attraction because I do the same, and I obviously can't speak for how they feel and I definitely can't label them. What ever they chose to call themselves, if they even do, I bet having millions of people every day following you as an audience is scary enough, I wouldn't blame them if they didn't want to come out just yet. But the dropping hints/mentioning attraction might be a big thing for them, and might be easier than a clean-cut 'I like ___ and I am ____'. It was and still is for me. But again I can't speak for them, this is just experience as being still kind of in the closet. This probably doesn't make sense, I'm sorry.

I can 100% relate!! I'll put my experience under a spoiler for those who don't want to read it.

So, I'm pansexual. It took me awhile to come to terms with my sexuality but there you go. I came out to my closer friendship group before my family, and thankfully they were all accepting because a majority of them were LGBT+ too (Two gay guys, two bisexual girls, and another girl who doesn't know yet), however at the time only one of the guys was openly gay, so it was a terrifying moment for me. I've always been quite scared that because I'm pansexual girls will automatically assume I'm attracted to them, so I rarely ever tell them.

With my family, I came out to my mum and brother when we were having an argument over LGBT+ rights (me and my mum), I told her she didn't have any authority because she's straight and hasn't experienced what they have, so she told me I didn't have any authority too, and I just told them. My brother took it the best, he's in a somewhat laddish group but he's always been amazing about it. Just shrugged and said "Okay", my mum did research on it - bless her. She didn't know what pansexuality was (not surprisingly) so had to look it up after I told her.

I've never told my Dad because I'm too awkward, but he's heavily implied that he thinks I'm a Lesbian. Go figure. I've never told my parents when I've dated someone because I don't want to be under any awkward interrogation, and I always have the wariness in the back of my mind that we might break up. My Dad is the kind of guy that doesn't like seeing two men kissing on TV, but is fine with two women. He also said he didn't see the point of pride parades, and that straight people didn't have a parade, but shut up when I told him that they can have a parade the next time one of them gets killed based solely upon their sexuality.

Never even implied anything to other family members, many of them would probably be accepting but I don't want to go through the anxiety of coming out to people again when I'm not currently dating anyone.

Now the school is where I drop my implications. I go to a Catholic School, and whilst many people are out, and generally accepted, there are still some dickheads that are homophobic. It seems a few people think I'm a Lesbian (probs bc I've never openly dated anyone), one girl who hates me asked me and I obvs replied no, and this other guy whos a dick asked my openly gay friend whether I was butch or femme. Lovely But the wonderful thing about being pansexual, is that someone can ask me if I'm a Lesbian and I can honestly say no, then somebody can ask me id I'm bisexual... and I can honestly say no. People don't often know about it, so don't often ask. It's brilliant.

One of my friends accidently outed me to this girl in my school who's a lesbian, she asked what my sexuality is, and then my friend went through the process of explaning pansexuality to her and told me it was incredibly difficult. Mh friend was horrified when she learnt I wasn't out and felt so terrible, but honestly I'd lowkey prefer if people did that as opposed to me telling people. Idk if anyone would feel the same, but I'd prefer to ignore the whole confrontation of it.

I spent about 20 mins writing that aha, well at least it's off my chest for y'all

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:32 am**

droopy wrote:
These are all good points! And not to get too personal, but I can say from experience that having certain religious/spiritual beliefs does not automatically mean the person has certain other beliefs. Like you said, people will believe what resonates with them on a spiritual level, regardless of what opinions others with similar beliefs have. And I feel like it's pretty obvious that Dan adores his grandmother, so no matter what she believes or knows about him, they have a good relationship. (And like, if she watches his videos, then he must be okay with her seeing everything we see, so...)

My mums side are Catholic. When I told them I had a girlfriend my Nana always asked after her and made her feel special. My nana was a practicing Catholic, literally up until the day she died. But never had a problem with me being queer. My aunt is the same, practicing Catholic who told me she'd throw people out of her wedding if they made even the slightest comment against me. My uncle on the other hand, raised Catholic but non practicing, now barely talks to me unless he has to. Go figure.

I also went to a Catholic college and quite literally nobody cared, except for one teacher. I'm guessing 80-90% of my friends were LGBT and nobody cared. It was great.

Point being, bigots are bigots. And Dan clearly has a great relationship with his grandma.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 12:26 pm**

karma_yeah wrote:I think there are probably multiple reasons for keeping their sexualities vague. Not just audience, but they may not be "out" to family (standard disclaimer: "if" they aren't straight). It would also pretty much "out" their relationship, and as you mentioned, given how highly they value their privacy, I don't think they have any desire to do that.

Phantasy wrote:I think 2017 Dan is much more in a glass closet, but I think the one thing that holds him back now (as it did then) is if he identifies as queer, it really narrows the plausible deniability factor of the nature of their relationship.

Even if both of them came out as bi tomorrow, it wouldn't say anything about their relationship with each other. Lgbtq people can be just friends with each other and assuming they must be dating just because both aren't straight is kind of weird. Like, even if they both confirmed they were attracted to men, we'd know as much about their relationship as we do now. I guess fans would assume but they're already doing that now so that wouldn't change.

I guess you could argue that two queer men living together for so long were different from two straight men doing the same but I just don't think so. Just because attraction is possible doesn't mean it's there and just because two best friends both happen to be queer doesn't mean they're dating, no matter how long they've been friends. Them coming out would only teach us that them being together would actually be a possibility but nothing more. It would not out their relationship because two queer men don't have to be dating just because they've been friends a long time.

(I'm not saying I think they're not together or anything, I just want to put this out there because the idea that them being queer must mean they're also a couple is a bit farfetched.)

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:39 pm**

Katka wrote:(I'm not saying I think they're not together or anything, I just want to put this out there because the idea that them being queer must mean they're also a couple is a bit farfetched.)

This is where context comes into play - what you just described right there, them being queer therefore they must also be a couple, is farfetched.

But that's not really what's happening with phan. And two queer men with a decidedly romantic twist to their early interactions, a leaked love letter video, and eight years of togetherness with all signs pointing toward long term commitment (forever house and Phil wants a corgi) along with a very pointed lack of denying it within the past couple years that they've also been opening up more about sexuality makes it not farfetched.

They denied the relationship alongside the denials of being gay before; those two things went hand in hand on the timeline. The current counterpart involves yes sexuality references, no comment on relationship references. A lack of denial is not confirmation - but it's also not a denial, and that's why it's not farfetched to consider that they're a couple.

Posted: **Thu Jul 06, 2017 3:14 pm**

this is so lovely. look at phil! he is pretty! he looks tiny! (btw high ceilings, nice) he is wearing shorts! (#freetheknee) that facial expression! a good tweet, indeed.
now can someone analyse the oil candle and lava lamp and all the other candles and also the room structure and just all that domestic shit, tyvm

edit: and dan picked a new header and they said he could choose soft or sad. he chose sad. relatable

IDB

Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff

Re: Dan & Phil Part 49: Don't curl, quiff