IDB

Skeletorsrighthand wrote:

PhansThrowPillows wrote:

Stakhanov wrote:

jesuisunèléve wrote:

Artdefines06 wrote:Once again for those "Phil is turning thirty - doesn't he want to move out and settle down?" people in the back...



Does this look like the face of a man who wants anything he doesn't already have?

LOUDER.

Just in case the people in the back didn't hear...

Ok I' ll speak for the back people

The video was lovely and it shows (once again) that they have a pretty amazing interpersonal dynamic. They're funny, they're sweet, we love them for it. The baking vids are a great format to just bant about and you can see that the touring made them even better at working together.

Yup, i do think when they shoot a youtube video they basically consider it to be work. Which doesn't mean that it's void of real feelings or that we can't catch glimpses of how they act when they are just on their own. It does mean, imo, that it's a very bad idea to try figure out what their actual relationship is on the basis of anything that they select to show you in their uploaded youtube vids. You get directed, and you can't even know how exactly it's happening.
Before I try to read the tea leaves in their jokes and love stares I try to keep some stuff in mind (just trying btw , not saying i'm good at it ).

They're trying to make a video that's funny and well liked and broadly follows the previous halloween baking vids.

They likely have a loose script or at the very least made notes and talked about the video.

They are aware of the professional camera that's aimed at them (hi mr. camera reflection ) and you can clearly see they are conscious of the effect of certain angles and close ups on their audience ( "give the public what it wants Phil").

Similarly, I think they are aware that a large chunk of their audience loves it when they act flirty and endearing towards each other and eat up the dirty jokes. I know I do.
I mean, some people basically shouted at them to fuck on stage. All the TATINOF tours must have made it even more obvious to them that they have a huge 'phandom' who would like them to act consistent with the idea that they are a gay couple, regardless of whether they are or aren't They're not .

Every shot get carefully edited, you can see how Dan edited it and he occasionally zooms in on facial expressions. When you think about that, it seems very unlikely that they would leave in stuff that 'reveals' stuff they don't want us to know. He's seen every love stare and awkward joke you have and sometimes edits it for greater impact, sometimes edits it out. If they really are a couple in the closet who are bent on keeping it a secret, it makes absolutely no sense that they make these sort of video's and leave in all the intimate glances.. Literally any sort of other content would be better.

When I look at a facebook page of a good friend, i'm not assuming I get an accurate view of what's going on in his/her life. When it comes to Dan and Phil i think the reality of the situation is we know little to nothing about them. If you leave out the social media - the medium they used and that made their entertainment career- what source of information is left really? All we have is what they, as professional entertainers, want to show us through these manipulated channels. I'm not using 'manipulated' in a pejorative way here, i just think it reflects how these media are used: to communicate and selectively share to an audience of millions in a way you want to as an entertainer.

Whoops this all got horribly long. Just saying this in support of my view that i don't think we can point to any sort of still frame and reasonably try to argue that they must really be a couple or that they will live together.
They're good friends, so even if everything is 100 % authentic there's nothing in the fondness of Phil for Dan that must necessarily imply that they are in a romantic relationship.

I watched the baking vid again first thing in the morning and it just made me smile and get up with a good feeling. For me, that's the important part.

I understand what you are trying to say here. That everything is controlled and that looking at an isolated moments doesn't really reveal anything. And I agree BUT. For me personally, the reason why I think that they are together has little to do with ''cute moments and flirty bants'' but more to do with the bigger picture and often the moments they DIDN'T show makes it even more clear to me. But this is an endless loop what I really find confusing though is this:


'' All the TATINOF tours must have made it even more obvious to them that they have a huge 'phandom' who would like them to act consistent with the idea that they are a gay couple, regardless of whether they are or aren't They're not .''

How is this okay to you? Like how do you justify this kind of ''no fucks given queerbaiting'' and still find them cute? I'm actually genuinely wondering here and not trying to be antagonistic.

Re: Queer baiting
here we go the "are they gay discussion" i'm contributing this time since the subject of queer baiting is brought up. queer baiting as a concept is disgusting it trivializes being gay as something to be exploited or used it is simply put awful. (Yes i would think less if them if they are just queer baiting)

Re: shipping
but the problem here is that we are talking about real people
publicly shipping real people is inherently weird and wrong ( I still lowkey ship them though)
i will always remember that episode form south park episode tweekxcraig as a wake up call.

Re: the bolded part, I didn't really want to engage, but could you, please, explain why shipping real people is inherently wrong, in your opinion? as I understand it, shipping is wanting and/or believing two (or more) people to be in a relationship. I'll be very open here for a moment, if Dan and Phil aren't in a relationship (which would be weird to me for a number of reasons, but whatever), I'd still want them to be in the future. Because I believe they'd make a good couple and all that. Where's the harm in that? I see only one situation where it would've been inappropriate and that is if one or both of them had been in a relationship with another person. Which isn't happening, afaik, so I'm fine. As for the queerbaiting, there isn't any if there's no shipping, so I'm a bit confused about your position. You say people shipping Deppy publicly is wrong, but if Deppy queerbait, not only they would be disgusting, in your opinion, but it would mean they condone the shipping, so it would cancel the wrongness of it because there's consent (I assume the absence of consent is your problem with shipping, because I can't think of anything else).

Skeletorsrighthand wrote:Re: shipping
but the problem here is that we are talking about real people
publicly shipping real people is inherently weird and wrong ( I still lowkey ship them though)
i will always remember that episode form south park episode tweekxcraig as a wake up call.

Why is shipping public figures inherently weird and wrong? Is it that relationship speculation aspect, the seeing two people you want to be together aspect, or the fact that it's fans online talking about it? Are things like the Facebook movie and biographies that contain unproven speculation and the entire historical fiction genre also "inherently wrong"? Or like Hamilton, where LMM took the faintest hints of relationships between real people (a comma in the middle of a sentence!) and made them into whole storylines in his Broadway play? They're basically published/produced/for profit fanfiction. Is it wrong for fans to do it but okay for it to be done for profit? And what about couples that play into it and enjoy it? To say something is inherently wrong is putting a lot of blanket judgement on a very multi-facted situation.

I'm not interested in discussing the queerbaiting thing, so just to keep it Dan and Phil centric - I'll be back in a bit with some ridiculously over the top timestamps as soon as I've watched the video for like the tenth time.

alittledizzy wrote:

Why is shipping public figures inherently weird and wrong? Is it that relationship speculation aspect, the seeing two people you want to be together aspect, or the fact that it's fans online talking about it? Are things like the Facebook movie and biographies that contain unproven speculation and the entire historical fiction genre also "inherently wrong"? Or like Hamilton, where LMM took the faintest hints of relationships between real people (a comma in the middle of a sentence!) and made them into whole storylines in his Broadway play? They're basically published/produced/for profit fanfiction. Is it wrong for fans to do it but okay for it to be done for profit? And what about couples that play into it and enjoy it? To say something is inherently wrong is putting a lot of blanket judgement on a very multi-facted situation.

I'm not interested in discussing the queerbaiting thing, so just to keep it Dan and Phil centric - I'll be back in a bit with some ridiculously over the top timestamps as soon as I've watched the video for like the tenth time.

The only argument I've heard that has some basis about why shipping real people is wrong is that it drove larry apart and ruined their friendship. To that I say, Dan and Phil have been dealing with shipping for at least 5 years, and they're still very much friends, so the larry situation is more of an exception than a rule.

human wrote:

dans left hand wrote:i see other youtubers like hazel hayes, dodie etc

joining in with bullying dan and phil about how "stupid" their fans are lol

i thought hazel was their friend? god these youtubers are so snakey.

Friends but ultimately bitter and jealous that they can't imitate the genuine relationship Deppy have with their audience and the success they experience.

for the larry thing compared to phan -

what proof is there really for larry? compare it to deppys relationship and then see the difference between shipping two people.

i dont really ship but i still act like their in a relationship most of the time lol

double post accidentally

coffeepenguin wrote:
Re: the bolded part, I didn't really want to engage, but could you, please, explain why shipping real people is inherently wrong, in your opinion? as I understand it, shipping is wanting and/or believing two (or more) people to be in a relationship. I'll be very open here for a moment, if Dan and Phil aren't in a relationship (which would be weird to me for a number of reasons, but whatever), I'd still want them to be in the future. Because I believe they'd make a good couple and all that. Where's the harm in that? I see only one situation where it would've been inappropriate and that is if one or both of them had been in a relationship with another person. Which isn't happening, afaik, so I'm fine. As for the queerbaiting, there isn't any if there's no shipping, so I'm a bit confused about your position. You say people shipping Deppy publicly is wrong, but if Deppy queerbait, not only they would be disgusting, in your opinion, but it would mean they condone the shipping, so it would cancel the wrongness of it because there's consent (I assume the absence of consent is your problem with shipping, because I can't think of anything else).

I'm not Skeletor, but

There is a general philosophy in shipping that shipping two real people is worse than fictional. Because while one may just enjoy daydreaming about a potential/actual couple or squeeing behind their screen at fanfic or art, the internet is a vast place and that singular reaction of one person gets multiplied by hundreds of thousands. And not everyone are mature or respectful about it.

Real people exist (wow deep sentence), they have lives and a conscience and feelings and history and a future. Fictional characters don't, as much background or story arc there is, it's made up, it depends on the creator. You can't harm fictional characters, even if you can harm what they represent. You can't harass or stalk or have tunnel vision about a fictional person because they will never react. Real people's relationships with others can get damaged or even broken due to the expectation, behaviour and reward-system of millions of fans who collectively look at you like you are two pieces of meat that should be strung together.

It's a really long convo but that's the gist of it

gnostic wrote:

PhansThrowPillows wrote: I understand what you are trying to say here. That everything is controlled and that looking at an isolated moments doesn't really reveal anything. And I agree BUT. For me personally, the reason why I think that they are together has little to do with ''cute moments and flirty bants'' but more to do with the bigger picture and often the moments they DIDN'T show makes it even more clear to me. But this is an endless loop what I really find confusing though is this:


'' All the TATINOF tours must have made it even more obvious to them that they have a huge 'phandom' who would like them to act consistent with the idea that they are a gay couple, regardless of whether they are or aren't They're not .''

How is this okay to you? Like how do you justify this kind of ''no fucks given queerbaiting'' and still find them cute? I'm actually genuinely wondering here and not trying to be antagonistic.

I wasn't asked but I will offer my five cents anyway.

I don't always find them cute. Sometimes it gets too much. In fact, the moment I found out about Tatinof fanficton section, I felt sick to my sTomah and almost unstanned then and there.

But the reason I can usually stomach them and follow somewhat closely is the fact that the very reason I am so interested in them is their marketing, branding, audience manipulation, what have you. That is literally my primary interest (see signature). Having somewhat unusual moral boundaries helps

Of course, there are limits. I *had to* transfer myself unto Dan-is-not-straight camp earlier this year because otherwise (a) his recent attraction mentions would have been on level of queerbaiting I couldn't stand for and (b) I would be doing my own community a disservice.


In completely unrelated news, my girlfriend who is only casually into Deppy but very serious about cooking is live reporting her viewing of the vid to me and her outrage over their incompetence is hilarious

Hey PhansThrowPillows, nice to meet you.

Interesting motivation to be here Gnostic. You've mentioned your marketing interest before, i'm gonna say that's either a very clever way to camouflage your trash bin or some real professionalism right there They are indeed on the bleeding edge of the future of marketing. Which is scary, I wouldn't want big youtubers with such a tight and emotional connection to their audience to use all that influence to be a Sith Lord just sell products. It's fascinating and troubling at the same time that successful advertising would require that people feel that sort of connection with a person to raise interest for an advertiser. It's almost like the whole person itself and everything they do in their blogs get commodified.

That live reporting sounds very funny. I've heard from a good source that Dan once tried making pasta without using water. Could she be persuaded into doing a reaction video :p ?

PhansThrowPillows It's hard to put all my reasons big and small under words but i guess the straightforward answer is that I don't think that what they do is malicious. It's a personal opinion, based on my own ethical considerations.
I'm gay or at the very least bi myself and I don't think that what they do is that different to what i see around me in 'real life'. Sometimes things get flirty with my friends. Sometimes it's me who's starting the flirting, sometimes it's them. Often it's just bants and joking around. Arguably everybody falls somewhere on a sexuality spectrum and even your run of the mill straight as an arrow guy has some homoerotic interest. Humour is often a way to deal with any of these tensions, and ya know it's just good fun.

Of course, with their youtube channels slowly morphing into careers everything they do and every little way they act is under the limelight. I don't really know what queerbaiting means, it seems to mean different things to different people but essentially I don't think it's horribly wrong to play up being gay even if you're not. I'm not saying it's very moral. I think that yes, they use(d) their looks and maybe made the natural attraction they felt for each other appear bigger than it really was. They certainly tried to pursue being full time internet hoxo's and while to me personally they did make mistakes (dailybooth, formspring, V-day, cringy tweets *cough*) at no point do i think their deceit outweighs their generally positive and laudable content. If some of those things were done purely because it was instrumental to further their career, i can understand from a human point of view and i'm convinced that was sort of the 'norm' for up and coming social media stars. But yes, i expect more of them.

It's also really complicated and hard to draw a clear line of who's responsible for what. I believe their relationship, especially at the start, was ill defined and had professional as well as personal elements to it. A lot of the things that might be construed as 'baiting' might just be their real personality and their quirks. Maybe they are just (not really) straight guys that 'act sorta gayish' - whatever that means.

If you agree that behavior and sexual orientation are separate things and that a guy shouldn't act a certain stereotype 'manly' way around other people I gotta ask what you think is really wrong with them pretending to be a gay couple. Isn't it nice that two men can just show affection as if they were a couple even if they aren't? If they actually are straight and just really close friends, you can also see it in a positive light and say they are really destroying gender roles. I see some validity in that point of view too.
( Sidenote: Like gnostic, I switched from thinking them being straight to them being probably sorta bi, but i'm still not sure, but god damn if they are straight they sure know how to think and feel like a genuine gay person and sqkdfsqh will we ever get confirmation. Phil roast yourself and talk about sexuality boxes plx ? ♪ just quit play games with my heart, my heart , .. ♪)

Last point, a lot of what they do and say is looked at through a prism, so especially when it comes to fan, I gotta keep repeating myself but the fact of the matter is that they have denied Phan being real, even on TATINOF but it's met with a 'lolz sure we know you lie/ just want to keep it a secret'. They ARE imo responsible in good part for their perception, my personal conviction is that they have decided for a good while now that they can't change the perception anymore and that they're fine with people thinking that they are a couple. Their modus operandi seems to be to not talk about it and just carry on doing what they are doing.
To which my response as a fan is: K, fine, i don't mind what you do. Actually if i'm honest I quite like it. You can have your fun and i'll have mine and nobody really gets hurt (in ways they don't like . Phan is just a fact of your public life. It's what happens when you play with fire (2009 flirting, sexy end screen dances, draw phil naked.. need i say more) and when you don't want to take a bold stance for truth because you fear your audiences reaction (custumor service blog wasn't really a fan favourite)

This song has been playing in the back of my mind while writing this. Wouldn't this be a great soundtrack for a compilation vid with all the flirting-cooking footage. I see a star role for Barry the Bowl.


Halp i'm musically stuck in the mid '00s

eevee wrote: The only argument I've heard that has some basis about why shipping real people is wrong is that it drove larry apart and ruined their friendship. To that I say, Dan and Phil have been dealing with shipping for at least 5 years, and they're still very much friends, so the larry situation is more of an exception than a rule.

And to be fair that the shipping drove apart Larry is just speculation on fans part and not a fact. I personally suspect there was a lot of jealousy and ego related drama going on behind the scenes in that band and their friendship was doomed even without the shipping. (
That being said that fandom is home to some grossly intense, inappropriate and OTT shipping, no doubt about that.

melon lord wrote:

coffeepenguin wrote:
Re: the bolded part, I didn't really want to engage, but could you, please, explain why shipping real people is inherently wrong, in your opinion? as I understand it, shipping is wanting and/or believing two (or more) people to be in a relationship. I'll be very open here for a moment, if Dan and Phil aren't in a relationship (which would be weird to me for a number of reasons, but whatever), I'd still want them to be in the future. Because I believe they'd make a good couple and all that. Where's the harm in that? I see only one situation where it would've been inappropriate and that is if one or both of them had been in a relationship with another person. Which isn't happening, afaik, so I'm fine. As for the queerbaiting, there isn't any if there's no shipping, so I'm a bit confused about your position. You say people shipping Deppy publicly is wrong, but if Deppy queerbait, not only they would be disgusting, in your opinion, but it would mean they condone the shipping, so it would cancel the wrongness of it because there's consent (I assume the absence of consent is your problem with shipping, because I can't think of anything else).

I'm not Skeletor, but

There is a general philosophy in shipping that shipping two real people is worse than fictional. Because while one may just enjoy daydreaming about a potential/actual couple or squeeing behind their screen at fanfic or art, the internet is a vast place and that singular reaction of one person gets multiplied by hundreds of thousands. And not everyone are mature or respectful about it.

Real people exist (wow deep sentence), they have lives and a conscience and feelings and history and a future. Fictional characters don't, as much background or story arc there is, it's made up, it depends on the creator. You can't harm fictional characters, even if you can harm what they represent. You can't harass or stalk or have tunnel vision about a fictional person because they will never react. Real people's relationships with others can get damaged or even broken due to the expectation, behaviour and reward-system of millions of fans who collectively look at you like you are two pieces of meat that should be strung together.

It's a really long convo but that's the gist of it

This^ This is essentially the reason why I didn't ship people... err... before. Yeah, before.

I honestly wonder how Deppy can handle all of the shipping their fans are doing since more than a half of the Phandom (probably) ships them. I really wonder how they manage to do that. Their bond must be really strong to get pass that and even make a few jokes about Phan. They also have a history, so wouldn't it be, like, awkward? Mostly with Dan's replies on his Customer Service Blog or something? How do they handle that, and still keep on being cutesy and couple-y, like, almost every time?
I'm sorry, but my thoughts are a mess. Also, if they want people to know they're not together, they should move to different houses to make it clear, to low-key show the shippers that they aren't together, to draw a line, and to say that 'Phan is final'... or something, but why didn't they? Does that mean that they aren't that much against the shipping? Does that mean they aren't bothered at all by that? I'm pretty sure that they'll be bothered by it because most of their colleagues see them as 'together-together', more often than not. Does that mean that they have a little something going-on between them that they want to keep private?
They've been complaining for the lack of space in their past LS', and they can move out to different flats since they seem to have enough money to do so, and they can just... I don't know, go to each other's houses when they want to film a new video, but... I just remembered that they have DAPG while typing this.
Also, DAPG! Their channels seems to be on long-term, and we can assume that it's the same for DAPG, and... I doubt that they'll go to each other's houses just to film a few videos, and stress themselves over it.
...I realized that I just answered my own question in why they probably wouldn't move out. I'm sorry. I'm a mess, and this post probably contradicts itself, so I'm sorry.
...I'll post a timestamp for the Baking Vid later since I only finished half of the video.

Stakhanov where did they deny it in tatinof?

Just a small addition (cuz my post wasn't long enough lulz).

To me, the status of their relationship doesn't matter that much in enjoying their content. It's basically fine whatever. No kittens are drowned, the blow to the cherry industry will be severe but hey we're all just basically talking about how we think two people relate in the absence of any real personal relationship we have with them? In the end, they make vids, shows and books for entertainment purposes and we watch, listen and read for our entertainment right? Mostly.

I must point out that not believing they are a couple isn't cynical.
I do not watch them with an attitude of scornful or jaded negativity or have a general distrust of the integrity or professed motives of Dan and Phil.
I thought their video was lovely.

Also, i think that their sexuality isn't in any way obvious. They haven't really said much about it.
-Phil hasn't really spoken out it years. He once said he was bi on some social media profile. He is rumoured to have had relationships with guys, of which we know very little.
-Dan has contradicted himself on social media. He once said he was pansexual, he at other times denied being gay. He has said that he was in relationship with a girl for about 2 years.
That's about it really, if we don't want to use how we think they behave in vids.

melon lord wrote:There is a general philosophy in shipping that shipping two real people is worse than fictional. Because while one may just enjoy daydreaming about a potential/actual couple or squeeing behind their screen at fanfic or art, the internet is a vast place and that singular reaction of one person gets multiplied by hundreds of thousands. And not everyone are mature or respectful about it.

Real people exist (wow deep sentence), they have lives and a conscience and feelings and history and a future. Fictional characters don't, as much background or story arc there is, it's made up, it depends on the creator. You can't harm fictional characters, even if you can harm what they represent. You can't harass or stalk or have tunnel vision about a fictional person because they will never react. Real people's relationships with others can get damaged or even broken due to the expectation, behaviour and reward-system of millions of fans who collectively look at you like you are two pieces of meat that should be strung together.

Ok, so I've bolded some parts I really want to comment on. First of all, I feel like in its heart, this is the same discussion as Phil's "people are stupid" about fireworks, as in "do you trust people to be responsible"? Opinions may differ, but in any case, the internet is just a big megaphone for all possible reactions, so let's take a look at the situation at hand. Real people exist, you are right, but public figures are also somewhat constructed characters, see, like, every discussion people have here about the p-word. So, on the question of public perception, whatever issues Deppy had with their threatened masculinity and (I know nothing about larry, but I suspect the problem was mostly here), they've resolved it now. Also, Deppy don't have any public close relationship that could be damaged and people harassed (well, there was Dan's brother, but it was less about shipping, as I understand, and more about Dan himself, and maybe Cat, but I'm not sure how close they really are), they don't have public SOs and Phil's family, for example, is left respectfully alone and has always been, afaik.

So, what's left is their relationship with each other and I think they've demonstrated clearly enough how comfortable they are with making their own innuendos about it live on stage in front of thousands of people for a whole year, when nobody really asked for it (I leave aside Dan's "in character" reaction to fanfiction, which I'm still confused about btw, I loved how you started your post with "there's a general philosophy in shipping", I feel so sophisticated )

CallMeAyana, about the moving out thing, I just wanted to remind you that in Dan's latest video, Phil's presence was being taken for granted, there was no reference to it being a collab, or Phil being an assistant, or anything of that sort

fancybum wrote:Stakhanov where did they deny it in tatinof?

I can't find it on youtube. If i remember correctly, it was during a tatinof uk performance that Dan shakes his head in denial when people in the crowd shouted something like "Is phan real?"
The discussion might be burried somewhere in an earlier thread or in the tatinof subforum too.
They certainly denied it in the past. I agree that they haven't really said much about it for a long while. At no point have they ever confirmed it.

Stakhanov wrote: Also, i think that their sexuality isn't in any way obvious. They haven't really said much about it.
-Phil hasn't really spoken out it years. He once said he was bi on some social media profile. He is rumoured to have had relationships with guys, of which we know very little.
-Dan has contradicted himself on social media. He once said he was pansexual, he at other times denied being gay. He has said that he was in relationship with a girl for about 2 years.
That's about it really, if we don't want to use how we think they behave in vids.

Those attraction threads must be some impressive form of mass delusion I guess. I could've sworn they existed.

Stakhanov wrote:

fancybum wrote:Stakhanov where did they deny it in tatinof?

I can't find it on youtube. If i remember correctly, it was during a tatinof uk performance that Dan shakes his head in denial when people in the crowd shouted something like "Is phan real?"
The discussion might be burried somewhere in an earlier thread or in the tatinof subforum too.
They certainly denied it in the past. I agree that they haven't really said much about it for a long while. At no point have they ever confirmed it.

Oh. So hearsay. Got it.

Sorry for not being clear. I wanted to make my post longer but i couldnt articulate my thoughts properly.
Lets just say that there are idealy two sides
1. Them being in a relationship
2. Not being in a relationship

Scenario 1. They are in a relationship and keeping it a sceret.
- its pressuring them to come out
Lets face it shipping can get out of hand sometimes people assume thats its real on the spot. To the point where people try to peak into there private lives for clues and spread rumors. If they want to hide it let them hide it their not ready. So how do we solve this problem ? Stop it at the source.

Scenario 2. They are not on a relationship and they are just friends.

- its putting pressure in their friendship
If a person says to you that "hey A and B make good couples they should be together!" What would you feel ?weirded out i suppose i mean your only freinds right? Imagine that times a million the pressure would be huge if they where just freinds i cant imagine them staying together this long without breaking. And calling it quits.

Basically what im saying is that they are real people not fictional. And should be treated as such. Edit: And if you ship them keep it to yourself.

And you should watch that south park episode tweekxcraig its about shipping thats where my whole rant comes from.

Re: Baiting
I meant baiting in general should be frowned upon im not claiming that DnP are baiting but if they only do this things because it means that people would watch them ( i e baiting) that would be wrong. I shouldnt have used the word queer there it made less sense sorry for the misunderstanding .

Still so in love with the baking vid, have already rewatched it a few times and I just know I'll watch it a few more times.

I'm a sucker for Phil's jokes, they always make me laugh.

Artdefines06 wrote:Once again for those "Phil is turning thirty - doesn't he want to move out and settle down?" people in the back...

Does this look like the face of a man who wants anything he doesn't already have?

Cute af! There is just so much fondness there.

eevee wrote:

fancybum wrote:Yet it took until 2016 for somebody to think 'fine I guess Dan could be not straight'. So.
The mind truly boggles sometimes.

the world is an interesting and confusing place

fancybum wrote:

Stakhanov wrote: Also, i think that their sexuality isn't in any way obvious. They haven't really said much about it.
-Phil hasn't really spoken out it years. He once said he was bi on some social media profile. He is rumoured to have had relationships with guys, of which we know very little.
-Dan has contradicted himself on social media. He once said he was pansexual, he at other times denied being gay. He has said that he was in relationship with a girl for about 2 years.
That's about it really, if we don't want to use how we think they behave in vids.

Those attraction threads must be some impressive form of mass delusion I guess. I could've sworn they existed.

They are entertainers and their video's aim is to entertain their viewers. As in any entertainment medium/platform, viewers are free to interpret what they are watching. I think each and every viewer has the right to their own interpretation, at the end of the day what really matters is whether managed to make their viewers enjoy/love/like their delivery. Well I for one enjoyed it and I am free to read their actions the way I want to, does not matter to me how others see it. Why would it matter to me how others' perceive their "show", its my perception that matters to me as a viewer. What is important to me is that they perform and it made me "feel good".

melon lord wrote: You can't harass or stalk or have tunnel vision about a fictional person because they will never react. Real people's relationships with others can get damaged or even broken due to the expectation, behaviour and reward-system of millions of fans who collectively look at you like you are two pieces of meat that should be strung together.

I have so much to say. Not just at you, melon lord, but also Skeletorsrighthand and everyone else who agreed with either of you.

- Do you feel the same way about traditional celebrities? Is shipping them wrong? For example, singers or actors?
- What about shipping straight couples? Was shipping zalfie wrong before it was confirmed canon? What about after? How about Brangelina?

What you're saying is, if you boil it down to just the bones, is it's wrong to treat celebrities like they're not human, but rather characters. I'm going to draw a lot of parallels between how we treat Youtubers and how fans treat traditional celebrities because I don't see a huge difference.

By your logic, the paparazzi is immoral. You mentioned "stalking." Does the paparazzi stalk celebrities when they follow them and take pictures of them? Is that wrong? If it's so wrong, why is it legal?

By your logic, idolizing as well as hating celebrities is immoral. "Tunnel vision." So everyone who unconditionally idolizes Beyonce or Niki Minaj is immoral. As well as everyone who hates Taylor Swift. Everyone who views celebrities in a different way they would view literally anyone on the street. I don't know about you, but I think it's pretty impossible to view celebrities as complete equals. More on that later.

By your logic, sexualizing celebrities is immoral. "look[ing] at [them] like [they] are two pieces of meat." So every magazine, poster, advertisement, movie, song, performance that relates celebrities in any way to sex, whether it be lyrics, provocative dress, provocative poses, whatever, is immoral. I'd hate to break that to the advertising industry...and the pop music industry, and Hollywood...

And finally, by your logic it is immoral to "ship" real people.

What is "shipping"? If you believe shipping is shoving a perceived relationship in the face of the celebrities it involves, whether that be via fanmail, in person, tweeting, whatever, then I feel you. That's pretty shitty. But let's be real. 99% of fandoms don't pull that shit.

Shipping is discussing the possibility of or logistics of a possible relationship. Between two or more fans. Talking about it. Not to the celebrity. Possibly even thinking about it by yourself, which is even less harmful.

So what you're telling me is that talking on a part of the internet about people that these people are in no way forced to read, see, or associate with or even privately in a closed chat room is inherently wrong and harmful. How could that possibly be harmful?

How about instead of telling people that thinking about a possible relationship, to themselves, or to their friends, is wrong, you attack people who are actually doing harmful things in society. Things that actually affect other people in a negative way.

pearshaped34 wrote:And to be fair that the shipping drove apart Larry is just speculation on fans part and not a fact.

Stakhanov wrote:Also, i think that their sexuality isn't in any way obvious. They haven't really said much about it.

I have some news for you...

fancybum wrote:Those attraction threads must be some impressive form of mass delusion I guess. I could've sworn they existed.

...yeah, that'd be a good place to start.

I don't have much to say on the current discussion as it's not something I feel comfortable talking about but logging onto here this morning and reading the pages felt like this. Baking video was adorable and quite lovely to me, though!! I still feel like complete trash about how happy they both were! Phil's been so happy lately. I can't remember if I've ever seen a video where he's that giggly thoughout the whole thing.

I don't have time to reply to the fanservice conversation (and tbh my post will be like ten miles long and it'll be off topic by the time I can sit down and write it, so I might just put it on the bingo board thread, but anyway, moving on) but I thought I might reply to the "shipping real life people" conversation. A while ago Hank Green made this post which I think is really great. I highly encourage everyone to go read it (no matter what side you're on), but I'll highlight a couple of the paragraphs that stood out to me:

When two people have a relationship, they are two people. They do not become one person, and they will always and forever have to work to maintain that relationship. That relationship is a fluid and changing thing that can stop existing or get complicated or unpleasant. Becoming a fan of a person and looking up to them and enjoying them is one thing, but being a fan of a relationship is a little bit of an incorrect idea. Relationships do not exist in the way that people do. People are real things while relationships are abstract and fluid ideas.

So when one is a fan of a person, or two people who are in or may be in a relationship, that is an admiration that can be useful and beneficial to both you and the person they like. But being a fan of the relationship I don’t think is good for anyone because the relationship is an abstract thing that almost definitionally (because it is private) is very VERY different in the heads of the observer than in reality.

Also I wanted to comment on this really quickly:

Stakhanov wrote: Also, i think that their sexuality isn't in any way obvious. They haven't really said much about it.
-Phil hasn't really spoken out it years. He once said he was bi on some social media profile. He is rumoured to have had relationships with guys, of which we know very little.
-Dan has contradicted himself on social media. He once said he was pansexual, he at other times denied being gay. He has said that he was in relationship with a girl for about 2 years.
That's about it really, if we don't want to use how we think they behave in vids.

How did he contradict himself? He said he was bi (and sort-of said he was pan?), and then he said he wasn't gay. A lot. There's not a contradiction in there? And "if we don't want to use how we think they behave in vids." why not? What about what they say in videos can't be used? And also, yeah, Phil hasn't really said much about his attraction to anyone (nor expressed it) but so what? Why does that mean when he said he was bi it wasn't true? (Also I realize this might come off as kind of rude, and trust me, I'm not trying to be, I've just had similar conversations like this with a lot of people so after a while I get annoyed at seeing the same thing said over and over again.)

Ok wow, same discussion again. Exciting.
I don't really see how this video was a new level of shipbaity compared to stuff they've done in other videos. If anything, it's a throwback to their earliest (more suggestive) content and a more chill attitude in general. I mean not backpaddeling on every innuendo and leaving a lot of the more natural reactions in. And I love it!

What I find more annoyingly fanservice-y is how they completely recreated some of the jokes from last years video (floury crotch shot, Phil eating the ingredients, Dan's orgasmic reaction to trying the pops). These scenes just made me hardcore but it's nothing tragic. Basically same issue with them playing games they seemingly don't enjoy out of "tradition". I just wanna go tell them: relax guys, you don't need to re-do everything people enjoyed at some point, you can try new stuff and people will still love it!

But apart from that I loved the video!! Lots of fun moments and cuteness and them both being hyper as I expect from a baking video (gosh did they really film this at 4:30am what is wrong with these guys)

Also Dan and Phil FYI Allspice is not all spices mixed together it's a seperate thing

CallMeAyana wrote: I'm sorry, but my thoughts are a mess. Also, if they want people to know they're not together, they should move to different houses to make it clear, to low-key show the shippers that they aren't together, to draw a line, and to say that 'Phan is final'... or something, but why didn't they? Does that mean that they aren't that much against the shipping? Does that mean they aren't bothered at all by that? I'm pretty sure that they'll be bothered by it because most of their colleagues see them as 'together-together', more often than not. Does that mean that they have a little something going-on between them that they want to keep private?
They've been complaining for the lack of space in their past LS', and they can move out to different flats since they seem to have enough money to do so, and they can just... I don't know, go to each other's houses when they want to film a new video, but... I just remembered that they have DAPG while typing this.
Also, DAPG! Their channels seems to be on long-term, and we can assume that it's the same for DAPG, and... I doubt that they'll go to each other's houses just to film a few videos, and stress themselves over it.
...I realized that I just answered my own question in why they probably wouldn't move out. I'm sorry. I'm a mess, and this post probably contradicts itself, so I'm sorry.
...I'll post a timestamp for the Baking Vid later since I only finished half of the video.

Even if they are just platonic best friends Dan and Phil probably haven't moved out to end shipping because they are still best friends and because of that they want to live together and spend their time together more then they care about internet rumours about them.

I'm sure it does help with filming that they live together and not just for collabs and the gaming channel but for help with behind the scenes stuff on some of their solo videos but still I don't think that's enough of a reason for them to remain in a living together all this time if that wasn't also their preferred living situation on a personal level.

I mean if it was just for work they feel the need to stay together they could easily look for places near each other and have the best of both worlds.
Whether they are romantic or not I think Dan and Phil are where they want to be.

fancybum wrote:

Stakhanov wrote: Also, i think that their sexuality isn't in any way obvious. They haven't really said much about it.
-Phil hasn't really spoken out it years. He once said he was bi on some social media profile. He is rumoured to have had relationships with guys, of which we know very little.
-Dan has contradicted himself on social media. He once said he was pansexual, he at other times denied being gay. He has said that he was in relationship with a girl for about 2 years.
That's about it really, if we don't want to use how we think they behave in vids.

Those attraction threads must be some impressive form of mass delusion I guess. I could've sworn they existed.

Stakhanov wrote:

fancybum wrote:Stakhanov where did they deny it in tatinof?

I can't find it on youtube. If i remember correctly, it was during a tatinof uk performance that Dan shakes his head in denial when people in the crowd shouted something like "Is phan real?"
The discussion might be burried somewhere in an earlier thread or in the tatinof subforum too.
They certainly denied it in the past. I agree that they haven't really said much about it for a long while. At no point have they ever confirmed it.

Oh. So hearsay. Got it.

Been there, done that. Mass delusion are you words, I think they are a bit harsh given all the ambiguity in their interaction.
Are you saying that when two men look each other in the eyes or touch each other that this means they must be in a romantic relationship?
Because about every ship uses still frames of the proclaimed lovers being intimate with each other. So clearly all ships are real.

You are right, let's not go by heasay. Actually, when you want to know the truth of the matter don't go by hearsay or still frames or tweets or carefully edited video's.
I have no problem admitting that i'm not certain of many of my thoughts about Dan and Phil because i admit that we as an audience simply aren't in a position where we can claim to know things. I think there is a lot open for debate.

I'm not here to say what people should think of Phan though. I came here to say i really enjoyed their new video and I replied to a direct question about queerbaiting. I react to the ongoing discussion and offer my view as one does in a forum. We can agree to disagree.
As stated before, i don't really care about whether they are a couple or not - or how they supposedly lead others on to believe that they are a couple. I enjoy their vids, and this one was one of the best of the year imho

Stakhanov wrote:Are you saying that when two men look each other in the eyes or touch each other that this means they must be in a romantic relationship?
Because about every ship uses still frames of the proclaimed lovers being intimate with each other. So clearly all ships are real.

You are right, let's not go by heasay. Actually, when you want to know the truth of the matter don't go by hearsay or still frames or tweets or carefully edited video's.
I have no problem admitting that i'm not certain of many of my thoughts about Dan and Phil because i admit that we as an audience simply aren't in a position where we can claim to know things. I think there is a lot open for debate.:

If the vday video didn't exist and the first year of Dan and Phil as documented on social media didn't exist, your argument would have more weight. But those things do exist, which means no one is basing a belief in phan or not simply on still frames or looks.

(Now I'm going back to happy stuff.)