IDB

For some reason I'm can't believe that he answered this? I don't know why, it really doesn't mean anything at all. But for some reason it just surprised me that he implied the guy could have been cute so casually.

anathema wrote: For some reason I'm can't believe that he answered this? I don't know why, it really doesn't mean anything at all. But for some reason it just surprised me that he implied the guy could have been cute so casually.

Nice!! That's not the first time. Just a continuation of the casual male attraction mentions we've been seeing. 2017 is looking bright

anathema wrote:

For some reason I'm can't believe that he answered this? I don't know why, it really doesn't mean anything at all. But for some reason it just surprised me that he implied the guy could have been cute so casually.

I feel you though, definitely did a bit of a double take reading this but in the back of my head I know I'm getting excited for no real reason.

The conclusion of this riveting interaction:
(I want them to be friends so badly.)

honestly the best thing to come out of 2016 was dan calling dudes 'cute' becoming a phandom recurring joke and dan fully embracing it (bc he obviously knows what he's doing), oh, how far have we come

this is my random pointless comment of the day hope u enjoyed it

sweetmm wrote:

So I guess Dan's trying to tell everyone they are not sharing a room hence the staff let himself in

Or Phil was already in the shower waiting...

I'm so used to hearing Dan saying boys are cute that whenever he does it my brain doesn't even register that in 2015 I would have had a midly freak out. Isn't it great?

sweetmm wrote:

So I guess Dan's trying to tell everyone they are not sharing a room hence the staff let himself in

I was thinking the same thing at first honestly. But then I thought about it and i don't really see how it is implied they aren't sharing? Phil isn't mentioned anywhere at all in here yes, but he could've been out of the room or dan just didn't think it was necessary to mention him in the tweet? I'm probably reaching, but there's nothing really here to imply Phil isn't sharing a room with him in just this tweet.
But then again, these are also the same two guys who, for some reason, would rather rent out two separate rooms, then spend hours upon hours in the others room only to use both rooms to sleep late at night instead of getting a suite with two rooms or a two bed room as of lately. So I could be totally wrong. You never know with these two.

confusedpanda wrote: I was thinking the same thing at first honestly. But then I thought about it and i don't really see how it is implied they aren't sharing? Phil isn't mentioned anywhere at all in here yes, but he could've been out of the room or dan just didn't think it was necessary to mention him in the tweet? I'm probably reaching, but there's nothing really here to imply Phil isn't sharing a room with him in just this tweet.
But then again, these are also the same two guys who, for some reason, would rather rent out two separate rooms, then spend hours upon hours in the others room only to use both rooms to sleep late at night instead of getting a suite with two rooms or a two bed room as of lately. So I could be totally wrong. You never know with these two.

I originally thought he was trying to say that he wasn't sharing with Phil too until I realized there's literally no reason to think that, so I agree with you, and I don't think we're reaching.

1. Phil could've just been out doing something, like talking to the front desk or buying something idk
2. Phil could've been in the room chilling while the guy came in. Even if Dan came out of the room with a towel it'd still be awkward if a stranger was there.
3. Phil could've been in the bathroom with Dan, yes

This tweet kinda rules out #2 unless they are at friendship level of casual nakedness, which is 110% possible:
Or yeah, they could have two rooms only to chill in one of them most of the time.

I think the reason why we originally thought it was a not-staying-with-phil claim is because we always assume that dan and phil are together all the time unless proven otherwise, so we assume that dan making a tweet about only himself rules out the involvement of phil, I guess? Which really makes no sense if you think about it. You wouldn't text a friend or tweet something funny that happened to you and be like "and oh yeah, my friend was there the whole time" unless that friend had a reaction that contributes to the story.

Now I'm just Getting Deep for no reason. But after a peek into the depths of my own brain, that's why I think it originally seemed like it was just Dan staying in the hotel room. But really it was just Dan alone in that moment.

eevee wrote:

anathema wrote: For some reason I'm can't believe that he answered this? I don't know why, it really doesn't mean anything at all. But for some reason it just surprised me that he implied the guy could have been cute so casually.

Nice!! That's not the first time. Just a continuation of the casual male attraction mentions we've been seeing. 2017 is looking bright

I hope 2017 brings more male attraction mentions like these. I interpret his male celeb/yters/ cartoon characters mentions a bit differently to him acknowledging that some random dude is attractive. Both are valid, but idk something about that tweet feels like a step in a new direction compared to countless "I'm in love with *insert male anime protagonist*".


But on another note, someone wanna poke him on the shoulder and let him know that it's okay if he wants to throw some female mentions in there as well? Listen, I'm fine living in a world where Dan only gushes about cute boys and hot daddies if he wants to. Yeah, I saw the diss track; he's aware that his mentions have people questioning his sexual identity. But I'm cynical and am inclined to align with those who believe the lack of female mentions are a deliberate professional choice, because he's aware of what that might look like as an adult man with a large teen girl audience. Yo but then still he'll occasionally sexualize female bodies (idk like talk about boobs and prob some other recent examples), so maybe it has nothing to do with that? I mean, when he does, I don't perceive it as him objectifying female bodies. lol What point am I even trying to make rn?

is today even real? Dan's hair is making me weak.

mysterylovescompany wrote:

is today even real? Dan's hair is making me weak.

They look so cute and cozy!! I love that they're hanging out with people while in LA and not just dropping by for one show.

Also, I see you Dan and your new $1,075 Vetements shirt. Werq.

Phil and Cat look so natural, then Dan with his paws and puppy-eyes with the curls. All those times he worries he doesn't look good, looks like he knows he's cute here. All of them look kinda cold, I guess November plus air conditioning. Nice that they're taking some time to relax out there, it's a long way just for a day's work.

That photo is adorable.

(Although someone mentioning the price of that shirt has me at Dan. If you're gonna pay that much for a shirt at least get one that isn't so plain. The font on his sleeve isn't even a nice one. I don't understand.)

rizzo wrote:

mysterylovescompany wrote:

is today even real? Dan's hair is making me weak.

They look so cute and cozy!! I love that they're hanging out with people while in LA and not just dropping by for one show.

Also, I see you Dan and your new $1,075 Vetements shirt. Werq.

Seriously, I thought Cat was visiting them at their hotel room and Dan was wearing pajamas I did not notice the sign at the top that indicate they were outside.

rizzo wrote:

mysterylovescompany wrote:

is today even real? Dan's hair is making me weak.

They look so cute and cozy!! I love that they're hanging out with people while in LA and not just dropping by for one show.

Also, I see you Dan and your new $1,075 Vetements shirt. Werq.

woke up this morning, checked twitter, saw the word "sex" on dans shirt and thought i was dreaming.
nope. I love it

it was either the complete works of Albert Camus or DAPGO i had no choice, it was an ok book its more like a souvenir style, i'm probably going to read it again when i'm older and have a nostalgia trip. my favorite part has to be Dan in the dressing room mirror anyone got a high quality picture of that ?

i don't understand why people care if they share or not share their rooms when on BUSINESS TRIPS. unless it's a vacation, i suspect someone else books the rooms? maybe i overestimate the support they get for their work stuff (since they say they do everything themselves), but i just figured if someone organizes the event, they are also responsible for booking their accommodation (in this case, the publisher)? at least that's how it usually works.
as someone who has done a job of managing & booking flights and accommodations for bosses and important company guests, i would never book one room for two VIPs, unless it was explicitly requested.

but again, no idea whether d&p do it themselves/have martyn do it/etc.

mysterylovescompany wrote:

is today even real? Dan's hair is making me weak.

A cute pic, and yaay for Dan's hair.
Also nice to see them socializing.

My Advent Calendars and Calendar came today. (thankfully this year before the start of December.)

Dan as Elsa is everything I need in Life.

March and December are my favourite. I could go without seeing Dan and Phil as minions again!! (can't wait for April! )

mysterylovescompany wrote:

is today even real? Dan's hair is making me weak.

Dan is giving me life. Sweater paws and that hair. Yes Please.

fancybum wrote:

omgomgomgomgomgomgomgomgomg guys i'll cry

Even if it's just to privately hang out and we get no vids from it, I'LL CRY. I mean I wouldn't object to a measly little instagram photo just saying, but I'm not greedy. Chris has been in LA for WEEKS now doing secret things. Honestly I need to find people to obsess over who are actually into sharing their private lives. Things would be so much easier that way, sigh.

"Are you both in LA?"

Yep, he went there.

jesuisunèléve wrote: "Are you both in LA?"

Yep, he went there.

I don't get it.

fancybum wrote:

jesuisunèléve wrote: "Are you both in LA?"

Yep, he went there.

I don't get it.

Both - I see it as a joke

How so when in response to a pic of both of them in LA? Seems like a reach.

fancybum wrote:How so when in response to a pic of both of them in LA? Seems like a reach.

Is it a "hey buddy you in London?" Joke?