IDB

Guys he's made like nine mentions of his family's financial situation. Nine mentions in seven years. And when he does mention it, it's generally just an offanded comment like "oh yeah, my family couldn't afford ____," and then he moves on. I don't think he's going out of his way to portray himself as poor and underprivileged as a child or anything. And he doesn't seem particularly bitter about it either; he just talks about it like it's a fact of life. Like, the matey thing was a happy memory for him. He wasn't complaining about it. I don't get any "woe-is-me" vibes from him on this front.

Also, I'm not sure why his parent shade is being collated with his comments about his family not having much money. The only time the two have overlapped, imo, is maybe his comments about the Colin mug. But I don't think his resentment of his parents has much to do with them not being rich or buying him stuff.

I do get uncomfortable when Dan throws shade at his parents. Because they really can’t defend themselves.
For me Dan is like an unreliable narrator, which leads me to question a lot of what he says to be honest. I don’t always take the things he says as truth. Mainly because as dia said, Dan usually remembers/talks more about the negative things than the positive. Dan may not have had a best friend as a teenager, but he did have a group of friends and a girlfriend for some years, but if you hear him talk about his teenage years, you wouldn’t always be able to guess that.
I mean even now he always claims to have no friends, even if we all know that he does.
So yeah I do find it hard to always believe what Dan says.
I don’t doubt that Dan’s parents and his childhood weren’t perfect. Whose was?

oqua wrote:Guys he's made like nine mentions of his family's financial situation. Nine mentions in seven years. And when he does mention it, it's generally just an offanded comment like "oh yeah, my family couldn't afford ____," and then he moves on. I don't think he's going out of his way to portray himself as poor and underprivileged as a child or anything. And he doesn't seem particularly bitter about it either; he just talks about it like it's a fact of life. Like, the matey thing was a happy memory for him. He wasn't complaining about it. I don't get any "woe-is-me" vibes from him on this front.

Also, I'm not sure why his parent shade is being collated with his comments about his family not having much money. The only time the two have overlapped, imo, is maybe his comments about the Colin mug. But I don't think his resentment of his parents has much to do with them not being rich or buying him stuff.

mother

where would you say it stems from then? not in an accusatory way i just need your opinion on the matter

Well, its been a while. Hope everyone is well

Here are my completely out of place views about a variety of things that have happened recently.

Liveshows:
Is there a channel that does "best of" snippets? I generally just read the review because they happen at an awful time and I never seem to actually be able to catch up.

Sims:
I actually really loved this sims episode because it was a bit different, and I feel like they are following their own formula a lot less. My favourite sims series is Jacksepticeyes because he changed things up every week which I enjoyed. I wish they would have Dil and Tabitha have a few more kids, age some of them up and start going out a bit more with them. Maybe give them some friends or continually change their careers. I do enjoy the bants, but I wish they explored the game features a little more.

ISG:
I actually quite like this series. I watch a lot of beauty gurus who basically do the same three videos, so repetitiveness isnt something that bothers me. I don't know much about Dan hyping it up because I don't watch live shows, but it seems a bit ridiculous to me that people were expecting a coming out/kink video. I understand a level of disappointment for people who don't like ISG, but I've never understood why people hype the videos so much to a level that they will never be. I was expecting maybe a story time video, not a heartfelt confession type video. Then again it was probably only about 4 people who had hyped it to that level.

Anyways this has been fun. See you again in several months when I actually remember to post an opinion vaguely in tune with the current discussion (or close enough to the actual video being uploaded)

000dia000 wrote:And I think if we're going to sympathize with Dan not having Matey or not having the initiave to create and do.his. job. Then you're idealizing a fictional character. Dan's a real person and he's not caught our for the real world and my patience is being worn thin that we continuously defend him over and over again.

That's what I meant the other day, just worded so much better!

SquishPhan wrote:I do get uncomfortable when Dan throws shade at his parents. Because they really can’t defend themselves.
For me Dan is like an unreliable narrator, which leads me to question a lot of what he says to be honest. I don’t always take the things he says as truth. Mainly because as dia said, Dan usually remembers/talks more about the negative things than the positive. Dan may not have had a best friend as a teenager, but he did have a group of friends and a girlfriend for some years, but if you hear him talk about his teenage years, you wouldn’t always be able to guess that.
I mean even now he always claims to have no friends, even if we all know that he does.
So yeah I do find it hard to always believe what Dan says.
I don’t doubt that Dan’s parents and his childhood weren’t perfect. Whose was?

to the bit in bolded - i see this too, he constantly says 'i have no friends' yet there is clearly almost always one beside him (phil) and we all know that he hangs out with people when he has dinner/meets up for drinks etc. it's just a little weird, i know it's #relatable and stuff, but is it really when it's clearly not true? i find it hard to believe dan sometimes, just some things seem off when you already know that it's not true. idk, it just feel weird. theres #relatable and to some of the audience (who might not see tweets/instagram etc) then they might not know any different, but for alot of us we know they both go out. they have friends. they literally do have friends. and the whole 'i dont go outside' thing im not gonna even go over

also - thephandommenace, thanks! im really trying to! lol

So many thoughts on everything that’s happened this week…here’s my attempt to summarize them:

Dan and his fam and the chat-ching: ISG9: Da Sims: Phil’s ls: Finally, an off-topic mini-plug:
[offtopic][/offtopic]

starlight-still wrote: Finally, an off-topic mini-plug:
[offtopic]

Has anyone been watching Pls Like on BBC Three? It’s wickedly sharp satire on the whole YT phenomenon, particularly the Gleamers (though nothing aiming specifically at Deps as far as I can tell…ngl, I was hopin’ for it) as well as BBC’s own attempts to ‘capture’ contemporary culture. It’s great if you’re looking for a light and easy laugh and it's all posted on YouTube; the final episode comes out today, I believe.

[/offtopic]

[offtopic]...Just logged in to say that I can't wait for the final episode! I love the satire, and the fact that there is actually a story line behind the challenges. This is one of those things that I'll re-watch any day [/offtopic]

Birdie wrote:

000dia000 wrote:And I think if we're going to sympathize with Dan not having Matey or not having the initiave to create and do.his. job. Then you're idealizing a fictional character. Dan's a real person and he's not caught our for the real world and my patience is being worn thin that we continuously defend him over and over again.

That's what I meant the other day, just worded so much better!

not trying to antagonize in any sort, but i don't really understand why this is such a controversial topic though? none of us actually know dan and phil, so in a way every discussion that surpasses talking about their content is based on interpretation and, to some extent, fictionalizing. i would suspect that many people who sympathize with things like specific experiences (which we ultimately can't put into context because we don't know the context) or, say, the possibility of a creative slump do so because they relate to it while at the same time being aware that it's still speculation / interpretation. at least part of his content (prominently rwdaf) invites the viewer not only to relate to the content, but also to the creator, so i don't think it's surprising that parts of his audience also sympathize with him for, say, ditching a video, and speculating if it might be due to reasons that they might relate to. i fully agree with the sentiment that dan's a grown up person, he doesn't need warriors making "dan's a soft flower boy and could never do anything wrong uwu" posts in his defense, and it's of course perfectly fine to voice criticism or annoyance about him, but i also don't think it's "blind-sided" to sympathize or relate to what he shares, even if we don't know the full story to these instances. sympathizing to something doesn't equal thinking that it's worst possible thing that could ever happen to anyone or that nobody has it worse or that the person has zero fault in it happening.

And there's part of the reason I think they're addictive to me - they're relatable and interesting on one level in what they share, but there's enough vagueness from the things they choose not to share to let us fill in the blanks as we wish. Sometimes in multiple ways. It's not hard to imagine they're even more relatable and interesting based on the clues you pick up on most.

They're complex because they're real human beings, but far enough away from me personally that they're also a bit fictional, like celebrities. If that makes sense. It was actually a bit surreal for me seeing them in person, like encountering something that wasn't quite supposed to exist. I don't personally feel like I'm "close" to them for what I know, which is fine with me. I'm quite happy to be an anonymous nobody.

I watch D n P because I like Dan. There- that's it. I find him to be and interesting and (dare I say it) relatable person who I look up to. I also like the Dan and Phil dynamic but at times I even feel a bit tired of it.
I'm not sure why people are dragging Dan and calling him ungrateful just because he mentioned that his mom didn't use to buy a bubble bath? He might be a little bitter, but imo that is none of our business, we are not his parents.

thephandommenace wrote:
I'm interested to know why people here (especially the longtime fans) are so interested in/entertained by after so long that you still watch and support them so loyally? Could it be the interaction and feeling closer to them than you would with a TV show/other fandoms? Do you go to them when you're having a bad day

Uh I've been watching them for six years and well its just part of my relaxation routine when I get home before I move on to do work or other productive things again. A video normally doesn't take that long to watch. If I like it I watch it and if I find I'm not enjoying it, I click out - that's all! I stay subscribed to them because they produce more videos I like than videos I don't like. Simple as that.

Of course now it has changed slightly now that I'm on here and seeing the other parts of it rather than just their videos gives me a different view because I also see what others are thinking rather than my own "I like it/I don't like it" view - but ultimately it still boils down to that

I watch D and P just because I love both of them (especially Phil) as people, I can escape the real world, they are relatable and have similar interests, and they make me laugh I guess

I watch Dan and Phil because they entertain me, and for the most part I like who they are (or who I think they are). I’m more of a Phil fan, but also really like their chemistry.
Being part of a forum such as this helps to keep me interested.
For me it is not about interaction at all, since I don’t tweet them or leave comments anywhere, whether that is on their vids or on younow. I don’t feel close to them nor is that something that I really want.
As long as they keep entertaining me, I'll stay a phan.

i just think dan needs to see a therapist when all is said and done.

starlight-still wrote: Even with this, I don’t think he’s saying his parents were awful and he had a miserable childhood. It comes across more as an adult reflecting on how his values differ from those he now sees as flawed human beings, much like himself. It’s actually a very loving thing to say and do, to be honest (here I go with my “but Danny is so cuddlwy and sweeeet” bit…. …can’t be helped).

Personally I disagree because to me he was in no way being "loving" in tone when he throws shade at his parents. He wasn't saying oh look they are fallible just as we are - he said some people have shitty parents and implied that his parents are part of that group. The tone was bitter and definitely did not sound affectionate to my ears.

Also to the poster who said Dan needs a therapist - well I feel uncomfortable trying to "diagnose" people with anything but I think what Dan really needs to do, sorry to sound harsh, is to grow up - for lack of a better way to put it. He's so hung up over his creative issues and his quality and male edgy viewers - in any other job even in the creative industry etc.if you can't put out good content you are gone. The world is unforgiving and moves on quickly - that's just how it is. Having creative droughts unfortunately doesn't always cut it as an excuse.

Moreover when people go to a play etc even if they like the actor they still analyse it critically - in the sense of critiquing rather than critical - and that's what YT audiences have the right to do as well. They can say "oh this wasn't very good" as long as it is not offensive or a personal attack. So Dan's snappy tweets to his fans - those who critique or those who support - are just not on.

Lastly, his whole "everything is a joke haha everything I say is a joke you can't take me seriously" is indeed getting very old very fast. So what's a joke and what isn't? Are his audiences always a joke for taking what he says seriously? Are they always wrong? Some expectations are definitely fandom-created but it's also undeniable that a lot are fed by Dan himself - are his own words during his liveshows a joke then?

Maybe I sound angsty but I just feel that Dan has to mature and see things from a better perspective is all (: I still like his content in general of course but he's just sometimes rather silly

flurry wrote: Also to the poster who said Dan needs a therapist - well I feel uncomfortable trying to "diagnose" people with anything but I think what Dan really needs to do, sorry to sound harsh, is to grow up - for lack of a better way to put it. He's so hung up over his creative issues and his quality and male edgy viewers - in any other job even in the creative industry etc.if you can't put out good content you are gone. The world is unforgiving and moves on quickly - that's just how it is. Having creative droughts unfortunately doesn't always cut it as an excuse.

Moreover when people go to a play etc even if they like the actor they still analyse it critically - in the sense of critiquing rather than critical - and that's what YT audiences have the right to do as well. They can say "oh this wasn't very good" as long as it is not offensive or a personal attack. So Dan's snappy tweets to his fans - those who critique or those who support - are just not on.

I don't understand this contradiction. You say that Dan has to move on from his creative issues and 'male edgy viewers' (when did Dan ever say anything about 'male edgy viewers?). Then you also say that he cannot get angry at people when they criticize him. I agree with the second point. I did not like his passive aggressive response to his viewers. But obviously these things go hand in hand. If he does not put effort into his videos he will get criticism, like he did for this ISG. So you would think that he should worry about the quality of his videos, so that he can make better videos and not have to have this tense, disappointed relationship with fans

I forgot to commend Phil on his lovely live show in the midst of my negativity - he made me laugh with his 'dillypants' line and I love that he went on what he called a long aimless rant (still nowhere near as long as Dan's average monologue haha). I loved hearing about his uni experiences. I'm so close to the end... Must... Hold... On...!

For some people here stanning them is as simple as just liking them and their content, but I'm confused at myself and how deep I managed to get in such a short space of time. Details: It's not in my nature to be obsessed with 'personalities', that is to say, real people; I've never in my life been obsessed with band members or actors or writers. Rather, I get invested in characters and fandoms. Perhaps Deppy are the best of both worlds as they are 1) entertaining, 2) relatable dorks, 3) handsome guys with celebrity(?) status and a huge self-sustaining fanbase, 4) have an air of mystery and shape their own narratives through storytime vids, anecdotes, structured content, etc. They really are like characters on a TV show, but heightened, as they can step beyond the restrictions of their narratives and speak to the fans, letting us know even more about their characters. With that, and a lot of meta RPF out there, I often find myself blurring the lines between fantasy and reality. Just me? Okay.

But hey, there doesn't need to be a deep reason for stanning. People like what they like. I'm just so confused at myself and what it is about them that makes fans 'obsessed'.

spaceguitar wrote:

flurry wrote: Also to the poster who said Dan needs a therapist - well I feel uncomfortable trying to "diagnose" people with anything but I think what Dan really needs to do, sorry to sound harsh, is to grow up - for lack of a better way to put it. He's so hung up over his creative issues and his quality and male edgy viewers - in any other job even in the creative industry etc.if you can't put out good content you are gone. The world is unforgiving and moves on quickly - that's just how it is. Having creative droughts unfortunately doesn't always cut it as an excuse.

Moreover when people go to a play etc even if they like the actor they still analyse it critically - in the sense of critiquing rather than critical - and that's what YT audiences have the right to do as well. They can say "oh this wasn't very good" as long as it is not offensive or a personal attack. So Dan's snappy tweets to his fans - those who critique or those who support - are just not on.

I don't understand this contradiction. You say that Dan has to move on from his creative issues and 'male edgy viewers' (when did Dan ever say anything about 'male edgy viewers?). Then you also say that he cannot get angry at people when they criticize him. I agree with the second point. I did not like his passive aggressive response to his viewers. But obviously these things go hand in hand. If he does not put effort into his videos he will get criticism, like he did for this ISG. So you would think that he should worry about the quality of his videos, so that he can make better videos and not have to have this tense, disappointed relationship with fans

i think in one of his liveshows (most likely the pastel one) he mentioned edgy teenage boys that watch him for the memes, or words to that effect. side note but as an authority figure on boys, i think that he definitely overestimates the amount of edgy males in his audience.

spaceguitar wrote:

flurry wrote: Also to the poster who said Dan needs a therapist - well I feel uncomfortable trying to "diagnose" people with anything but I think what Dan really needs to do, sorry to sound harsh, is to grow up - for lack of a better way to put it. He's so hung up over his creative issues and his quality and male edgy viewers - in any other job even in the creative industry etc.if you can't put out good content you are gone. The world is unforgiving and moves on quickly - that's just how it is. Having creative droughts unfortunately doesn't always cut it as an excuse.

Moreover when people go to a play etc even if they like the actor they still analyse it critically - in the sense of critiquing rather than critical - and that's what YT audiences have the right to do as well. They can say "oh this wasn't very good" as long as it is not offensive or a personal attack. So Dan's snappy tweets to his fans - those who critique or those who support - are just not on.

I don't understand this contradiction. You say that Dan has to move on from his creative issues and 'male edgy viewers' (when did Dan ever say anything about 'male edgy viewers?). Then you also say that he cannot get angry at people when they criticize him. I agree with the second point. I did not like his passive aggressive response to his viewers. But obviously these things go hand in hand. If he does not put effort into his videos he will get criticism, like he did for this ISG. So you would think that he should worry about the quality of his videos, so that he can make better videos and not have to have this tense, disappointed relationship with fans

i think in one of his liveshows (most likely the pastel one) he mentioned edgy teenage boys that watch him for the memes, or words to that effect. side note but as an authority figure on boys, i think that he definitely overestimates the amount of edgy males in his audience.

cherrybomb3 wrote:
i think in one of his liveshows (most likely the pastel one) he mentioned edgy teenage boys that watch him for the memes, or words to that effect. side note but as an authority figure on boys, i think that he definitely overestimates the amount of edgy males in his audience.

Ok i see what you are saying. Sometimes when people say 'edgy male viewers' it sounds like Dan is being sexist to me, which is not how I perceive what he meant. I perceived it as being about gender roles and those 'edgy male viewers' not liking the more fluffy side of him. But tbh, if 'edgy male viewers' are about liking his clever and funny videos more than 'pastel edits IRL', then I must be an edgy male viewer.

lurker wrote: not trying to antagonize in any sort, but i don't really understand why this is such a controversial topic though? none of us actually know dan and phil, so in a way every discussion that surpasses talking about their content is based on interpretation and, to some extent, fictionalizing. i would suspect that many people who sympathize with things like specific experiences (which we ultimately can't put into context because we don't know the context) or, say, the possibility of a creative slump do so because they relate to it while at the same time being aware that it's still speculation / interpretation. at least part of his content (prominently rwdaf) invites the viewer not only to relate to the content, but also to the creator, so i don't think it's surprising that parts of his audience also sympathize with him for, say, ditching a video, and speculating if it might be due to reasons that they might relate to. i fully agree with the sentiment that dan's a grown up person, he doesn't need warriors making "dan's a soft flower boy and could never do anything wrong uwu" posts in his defense, and it's of course perfectly fine to voice criticism or annoyance about him, but i also don't think it's "blind-sided" to sympathize or relate to what he shares, even if we don't know the full story to these instances. sympathizing to something doesn't equal thinking that it's worst possible thing that could ever happen to anyone or that nobody has it worse or that the person has zero fault in it happening.

^^This.

Most of our discussions are based on assumptions, which is fine. And everyone has their own reasons to believe what they believe. Some of us interpret the exact same segment of a video in a completely different way than others do. Heart eyes Howell comes to mind, which some people can't even see while others find it obvious.

And that's with all situations. And all opinions and interpretations are valid and could be true but they don't have to be. Maybe real life is stressful right now, maybe Dan has mental health problems, maybe he is just very lazy and the only reason we are getting so many gaming videos is Phil, maybe it's a combination of some or all of these things, who knows. I enjoy reading everyone's point of view to most topics.

Tl;dr: I neither think people should wrap Dan in a blanket of comfort without ever criticising him nor should they say "just do your fucking job you twat" because it's not always that easy. Everyone can say what they believe but in the end we don't know the truth and it's all up to interpretation.

Birdie wrote:I’m so conflicted when it comes to the way Dan talks about his parents. On the one hand he says he basically lived in the ghetto and had no money (which I think is an exaggeration. Not saying they were rich but they probably weren’t as poor as he says either judging by what we know about them), that his parents crushed his dreams or whatever but then he also seems to have all these really good memories about them. What I don’t understand is his bitterness about his parents not supporting him on the one hand and then on the other hand admitting that they had no money to support his dreams. Which one is it? Did they not support him because they didn’t want to or because they couldn’t? Is there actually more to this or is he playing it up to be relatable?

That’s what I’m asking myself even though I shouldn’t because that’s his business and I feel invasive discussing it. (Not saying it is invasive, it’s just me.) But well, Dan is such a mystery, always alluding to stuff but never explaining anything. Not that he has to but of course his fans are going to be intrigued.

Couldn't it be that he's bitter about his parents not having enough money? And though that's not really anyone's fault, his parents are the easiest people to blame and take his bitterness/anger/frustrations out on.

After watching Phil's LS, two things: YouNow actively monitoring their live shows CONFIRMED (they basically tell him to open(?) messages.) I have a feeling that the boys are the biggest thing YouNow has going. Second, Phil, just do the laser surgery. It's uncomfortable for a few days afterwards, but the results are worth the (very small) risk.

This forum is all over the place with topics right now so I'm not sure where this fits in. But, it sounds like we're getting another horse prince video tonight.