IDB

emerald wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:05 am I agree with what you said about the line being where the individual puts it. There's a lot of other evidence for Deppy being romantically involved other than just how they act around each other, but without any other information, I wouldn't label their relationship either. Honestly, I don't think the distinction between a romantic and a platonic relationship is that important, especially in this context. Dan and Phil clearly love each other, regardless of whether it's romantic or platonic, and they're best friends—yes, you can be best friends with your significant other and you probably should be if it's a long-term thing. Labels are superficial at this point because whether you're a firm believer, agnostic, or anti, I think everyone can agree that Dan and Phil love each other very much and that's basically all that matters.

captainspacecoat wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:48 am I think at the end of the day it's important to remember that we're all inherently coming at this with our own internal biases, and that's something we can't escape. I see Dan and Phil as a) not straight and b) in a relationship, and I have done since I discovered them in late 2012, and that's likely a result of me also not being straight, as well as interactions and events which I personally interpret as romantic according to my own standards and when placed in context alongside the bigger picture of Dan and Phil's 8 year relationship.

smol beans wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:06 am

emerald wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:05 am I agree with what you said about the line being where the individual puts it. There's a lot of other evidence for Deppy being romantically involved other than just how they act around each other, but without any other information, I wouldn't label their relationship either. Honestly, I don't think the distinction between a romantic and a platonic relationship is that important, especially in this context. Dan and Phil clearly love each other, regardless of whether it's romantic or platonic, and they're best friends—yes, you can be best friends with your significant other and you probably should be if it's a long-term thing. Labels are superficial at this point because whether you're a firm believer, agnostic, or anti, I think everyone can agree that Dan and Phil love each other very much and that's basically all that matters.

:respekt:
eeeeee i agree with this so much!
every individual will perceive things differently according to their own life experiences.
as a female i have a platonic, non-romantic relationship with another female. we've lived together, borrow clothes, know each other's families, go out, cook, eat, travel and done so many other things together.
so when i first discovered dan and phil that's how i perceived them. their friendship reminded me of what i have with my best friend and as mentioned, society does not bat an eye if 2 females are affectionate towards each other physically and emotionally. my sexuality was never questioned.

it doesn't mean i'm against shipping though!

it's a given that they genuinely love and care for each other.
it just goes back to dan's diss track how "it's hard to put you [him] in a box (society's comprehension)" and how he "keeps it blurry"; labels clearly don't matter to him.

autumnhearth wrote: Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:51 pm At first I thought it might be stairs, distorted by the window reflection, but now all I see are papers/cards of some sort.

However I'm more taken with Phil's pink hoodie, glasses and beginnings of a mustache.

aleanna wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:03 am

captainspacecoat wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:48 am I do however think that, while fetishisation of m/m couples does undoubtedly happen in fandom, it is used as a dismissal of people who believe they're together far too often. People who watch Jenna and Julien or Zoe and Alfie out of a specific desire to gush over their romantic relationship moreso than any particular interest in their individual content are never judged as fetishising straight relationships. And back when Dodie and Jon seemed to have some sort of romantic relationship going on people obsessively shipped them, and no such accusations were made. But that's a conversation for another day, I'll leave it there for now.

Kind of off-topic but also not: I hate when people accuse all people who read m/m romance and fanfic of fetishizing m/m relationships. I am a queer (which is the broadest label ever, but I use it because I feel it covers both my gender AND sexuality). I have read just about every kind of relationship possible. I've read romances featuring straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, asexual, transgender, and polyamorous relationships. I just hate it when people automatically assume that m/m shippers with vaginas are all problematic/homophobic. (Sorry about the rant, but this has been bothering me for years!!!)

jaej wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:52 am as a queer man i feel massively uncomfortable with a lot of the phandom because a lot of it definitely steps into fetishing. people might watch straight couples on youtube more to find them cute, but how often are they talking and speculating about their sex lives? implying things about the sex lives of people like zoe and alfie when like... one looks a bit tired or mildly touches the other ones arm or something would be criticised far more than if it was dan and phil. a lot of people think they're genuinely a couple but also talk about their private life in a way you wouldn't feel comfortable about with a heterosexual couple and it's important to evaluate that and why you feel fine saying it about own couple and not another

jaej wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:52 am as a queer man i feel massively uncomfortable with a lot of the phandom because a lot of it definitely steps into fetishing. people might watch straight couples on youtube more to find them cute, but how often are they talking and speculating about their sex lives? implying things about the sex lives of people like zoe and alfie when like... one looks a bit tired or mildly touches the other ones arm or something would be criticised far more than if it was dan and phil. a lot of people think they're genuinely a couple but also talk about their private life in a way you wouldn't feel comfortable about with a heterosexual couple and it's important to evaluate that and why you feel fine saying it about own couple and not another

jaej wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:52 am as a queer man i feel massively uncomfortable with a lot of the phandom because a lot of it definitely steps into fetishing. people might watch straight couples on youtube more to find them cute, but how often are they talking and speculating about their sex lives? implying things about the sex lives of people like zoe and alfie when like... one looks a bit tired or mildly touches the other ones arm or something would be criticised far more than if it was dan and phil. a lot of people think they're genuinely a couple but also talk about their private life in a way you wouldn't feel comfortable about with a heterosexual couple and it's important to evaluate that and why you feel fine saying it about own couple and not another

jaej wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:52 am as a queer man i feel massively uncomfortable with a lot of the phandom because a lot of it definitely steps into fetishing. people might watch straight couples on youtube more to find them cute, but how often are they talking and speculating about their sex lives? implying things about the sex lives of people like zoe and alfie when like... one looks a bit tired or mildly touches the other ones arm or something would be criticised far more than if it was dan and phil. a lot of people think they're genuinely a couple but also talk about their private life in a way you wouldn't feel comfortable about with a heterosexual couple and it's important to evaluate that and why you feel fine saying it about own couple and not another

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:12 pm

jaej wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:52 am as a queer man i feel massively uncomfortable with a lot of the phandom because a lot of it definitely steps into fetishing. people might watch straight couples on youtube more to find them cute, but how often are they talking and speculating about their sex lives? implying things about the sex lives of people like zoe and alfie when like... one looks a bit tired or mildly touches the other ones arm or something would be criticised far more than if it was dan and phil. a lot of people think they're genuinely a couple but also talk about their private life in a way you wouldn't feel comfortable about with a heterosexual couple and it's important to evaluate that and why you feel fine saying it about own couple and not another

I think that people overlooking how gay relationships are fetishized probably has a lot to do with how men are often sexualized with no repercussion, while women sexualized gets more widespread attention and backlash. Not always, but you get more outrage online, for example. Ever since people here pointed out how Dan, in particular, is publicly objectified by his fans, by the media, and by his own YouTube peers, I haven't been unable to see it. Yet, while it was the right reaction, Zoella got a public outcry of attention and support when The Sun called her underwear picture inappropriate.

Zoella and Alfie are seen as the "norm", nothing unusual or sexy about a typical m/f couple, I guess. However, a m/m or f/f couple is seen as more scandalous, out-there, and I dare say wild? At least to the stale bread that is mainstream. Likewise, it's kind of like how a lot of lesbian women feel uncomfortable by lesbian porn and how some straight men have lesbian fantasies. Because of this, I guess a lot of "men fantasizing about lesbians" thing is more widely considered gross yet "women fantasizing about gay men" is seen as empowering. This varies, community to community. Stumble onto /r/lesbians and it caters to just straight men, go to /r/actuallesbians and you find gay women. Judging by surveys (and I guess common sense) the phandom is still mostly young, impressionable women, some are here especially for the ambiguous relationship. There's going to be a dominating outlook, and "appreciation" for a certain something, and that's that. I wish it wasn't, and I appreciate a comment like yours, actually providing a different outlook. I wish I didn't have to read 13 year old straight girls talk about their favourite m/m ship and how they're "going to hell" for loving it, but you can't change a straight man's porn search history either, idk people can be kind of shitty, even without realizing it.


Kind of On Topic, I stumbled across a comment recently about why women in particular like shipping, and I thought that it was very interesting so I might share. It's an interesting observation on why women in particular are more likely to read and write fanfic, and also why lesbian/bisexual women also have interest in reading m/m pairings, separate to the typical belief that shipping is based on sexuality or fantasies:

PaladinAlchemist, a user from a Reddit thread wrote:From what I've seen and from my personal experience, it's this.
1.) Relationships between two men (romantic or not) in the majority of stories are far better written with much deeper connections than the (usually) cannon female/male romance.
2.) MANY female characters are written pretty shallowly, making the male characters far more interesting to expand on.
3.) Male/female relationships, whether we like it or not, come with an expected idea that the female is subservient. She is usually the one expected to give up her job, usually the one that's getting rescued, and if it's not her than it's him in a full gender reversal that's still dealing with centuries of baggage. Most m x m shippers, I'd imagine, are women. By shipping m x m, we can bypass everything that's ever bothered us about how the standard m x f relationships works.
4.) The "emotional" appeal. The truth of this statement aside or not, men are seen as less "emotional" than women. So many women see something incredibly attractive about a man who's more in-tune with his emotional side. The ultimate version of this is one male opening up emotionally with another, usually leading to romance in the shipping world.
5.) Romance is popular, so it's not all that surprising people take their favorite characters or relationship and put a romantic spin on it. and
6.) It's just hot in the same lizard-brain way some men find f x f hot.

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:12 pm I think that people overlooking how gay relationships are fetishized probably has a lot to do with how men are often sexualized with no repercussion, while women sexualized gets more widespread attention and backlash. Not always, but you get more outrage online, for example.

Zoella and Alfie are seen as the "norm", nothing unusual or sexy about a typical m/f couple, I guess. However, a m/m or f/f couple is seen as more scandalous, out-there, and I dare say wild? At least to the stale bread that is mainstream. Likewise, it's kind of like how a lot of lesbian women feel uncomfortable by lesbian porn and how some straight men have lesbian fantasies. Because of this, I guess a lot of "men fantasizing about lesbians" thing is more widely considered gross yet "women fantasizing about gay men" is seen as empowering. This varies, community to community. Stumble onto /r/lesbians and it caters to just straight men, go to /r/actuallesbians and you find gay women. Judging by surveys (and I guess common sense) the phandom is still mostly young, impressionable women, some are here especially for the ambiguous relationship. There's going to be a dominating outlook, and "appreciation" for a certain something, and that's that. I wish it wasn't, and I appreciate a comment like yours, actually providing a different outlook. I wish I didn't have to read 13 year old straight girls talk about their favourite m/m ship and how they're "going to hell" for loving it, but you can't change a straight man's porn search history either, idk people can be kind of shitty, even without realizing it.

alittledizzy wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:35 pm

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:12 pm

jaej wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:52 am as a queer man i feel massively uncomfortable with a lot of the phandom because a lot of it definitely steps into fetishing. people might watch straight couples on youtube more to find them cute, but how often are they talking and speculating about their sex lives? implying things about the sex lives of people like zoe and alfie when like... one looks a bit tired or mildly touches the other ones arm or something would be criticised far more than if it was dan and phil. a lot of people think they're genuinely a couple but also talk about their private life in a way you wouldn't feel comfortable about with a heterosexual couple and it's important to evaluate that and why you feel fine saying it about own couple and not another

I think that people overlooking how gay relationships are fetishized probably has a lot to do with how men are often sexualized with no repercussion, while women sexualized gets more widespread attention and backlash. Not always, but you get more outrage online, for example. Ever since people here pointed out how Dan, in particular, is publicly objectified by his fans, by the media, and by his own YouTube peers, I haven't been unable to see it. Yet, while it was the right reaction, Zoella got a public outcry of attention and support when The Sun called her underwear picture inappropriate.

Zoella and Alfie are seen as the "norm", nothing unusual or sexy about a typical m/f couple, I guess. However, a m/m or f/f couple is seen as more scandalous, out-there, and I dare say wild? At least to the stale bread that is mainstream. Likewise, it's kind of like how a lot of lesbian women feel uncomfortable by lesbian porn and how some straight men have lesbian fantasies. Because of this, I guess a lot of "men fantasizing about lesbians" thing is more widely considered gross yet "women fantasizing about gay men" is seen as empowering. This varies, community to community. Stumble onto /r/lesbians and it caters to just straight men, go to /r/actuallesbians and you find gay women. Judging by surveys (and I guess common sense) the phandom is still mostly young, impressionable women, some are here especially for the ambiguous relationship. There's going to be a dominating outlook, and "appreciation" for a certain something, and that's that. I wish it wasn't, and I appreciate a comment like yours, actually providing a different outlook. I wish I didn't have to read 13 year old straight girls talk about their favourite m/m ship and how they're "going to hell" for loving it, but you can't change a straight man's porn search history either, idk people can be kind of shitty, even without realizing it.


Kind of On Topic, I stumbled across a comment recently about why women in particular like shipping, and I thought that it was very interesting so I might share. It's an interesting observation on why women in particular are more likely to read and write fanfic, and also why lesbian/bisexual women also have interest in reading m/m pairings, separate to the typical belief that shipping is based on sexuality or fantasies:

PaladinAlchemist, a user from a Reddit thread wrote:From what I've seen and from my personal experience, it's this.
1.) Relationships between two men (romantic or not) in the majority of stories are far better written with much deeper connections than the (usually) cannon female/male romance.
2.) MANY female characters are written pretty shallowly, making the male characters far more interesting to expand on.
3.) Male/female relationships, whether we like it or not, come with an expected idea that the female is subservient. She is usually the one expected to give up her job, usually the one that's getting rescued, and if it's not her than it's him in a full gender reversal that's still dealing with centuries of baggage. Most m x m shippers, I'd imagine, are women. By shipping m x m, we can bypass everything that's ever bothered us about how the standard m x f relationships works.
4.) The "emotional" appeal. The truth of this statement aside or not, men are seen as less "emotional" than women. So many women see something incredibly attractive about a man who's more in-tune with his emotional side. The ultimate version of this is one male opening up emotionally with another, usually leading to romance in the shipping world.
5.) Romance is popular, so it's not all that surprising people take their favorite characters or relationship and put a romantic spin on it. and
6.) It's just hot in the same lizard-brain way some men find f x f hot.

I've basically expressed every opinion I have already and don't want to be redundant, plus I don't entirely disagree with any of this, but I do just really think it's not a black or white issue. Because for every 'lizard brain' type reaction there is someone who turns to m/m (or f/f) fic as something they can connect to because they're figuring out their own sexuality. And yeah, sex is part of figuring out sexuality, sex that you've been taught was taboo being the normal is incredibly gratifying. We don't need fanfic to glorify m/f sex; literally the entire rest of the world does that. If we lived in a world where every PG-13 movie out there could potentially show us queer sex scenes in shocking detail like they do straight ones (hell, even on tv) we probably wouldn't need online culture to overemphasize queerness in its creative output. That's not fetishizing to me, that's just trying to balance out reality to fulfill what we want out of media that media isn't giving us. Thirteen year olds saying they're gonna go to hell for having m/m ships are most likely just coming to terms with the fact that what connects with them most isn't what they've been raised for thirteen years to consider normal and it takes a while to sort through that.

People in their twenties/middle aged people who say the same, I've got nothing for though. But that's why the points in the post @dia quoted are also valid. Basically I just think you can't generalize everyone, even everyone in phandom, as having the same motivation.

queerofcups wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:08 pm

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:12 pm I think that people overlooking how gay relationships are fetishized probably has a lot to do with how men are often sexualized with no repercussion, while women sexualized gets more widespread attention and backlash. Not always, but you get more outrage online, for example.

Zoella and Alfie are seen as the "norm", nothing unusual or sexy about a typical m/f couple, I guess. However, a m/m or f/f couple is seen as more scandalous, out-there, and I dare say wild? At least to the stale bread that is mainstream. Likewise, it's kind of like how a lot of lesbian women feel uncomfortable by lesbian porn and how some straight men have lesbian fantasies. Because of this, I guess a lot of "men fantasizing about lesbians" thing is more widely considered gross yet "women fantasizing about gay men" is seen as empowering. This varies, community to community. Stumble onto /r/lesbians and it caters to just straight men, go to /r/actuallesbians and you find gay women. Judging by surveys (and I guess common sense) the phandom is still mostly young, impressionable women, some are here especially for the ambiguous relationship. There's going to be a dominating outlook, and "appreciation" for a certain something, and that's that. I wish it wasn't, and I appreciate a comment like yours, actually providing a different outlook. I wish I didn't have to read 13 year old straight girls talk about their favourite m/m ship and how they're "going to hell" for loving it, but you can't change a straight man's porn search history either, idk people can be kind of shitty, even without realizing it.

Sweet jesus. I'm not engaging in the fetishization conversation because...whatever. But oh my god, misogyny exists. Sexism exists. Patriarchy exists. These are systems of oppression that the world literally turns on and it burns me up that we're even approaching acting like talking about dudes being hot is anywhere near the way its been okay'ed for the world to literally objectify (and i do mean literally in the literal sense not the emphatic sense) women. Dan's not seen as respected by his "peers" because he's pretty? Boo fuckin' hoo. Let's not act like he's not raking in the millions while thousands (if not millions) of women are actually devalued, actually missing opportunities because, and only because, they're women.

And frankly, comparing the homophobia of a 13 year old using annoying as tumblr language to a grown ass man engaging in porn that's often actively violent as a 1 to 1 equivalency is a really fucking lazy analysis.

Also also fuck's sake there are literal industries made upon speculating on the romantic and sexual lives of celebrities, its called Hollywood.

And finally, if its just so creepy and terrible and intolerable then why are you (general you, not dia specifically) here? if we're all just so terrible and judgey and blah blah blah it must not be too bad because y'all are here, on the same website, engaging in the same conversations, or you're okay watching these conversations happen. So which is it?

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:09 pm Wow. If you find my comparison and reasoning weak, I accept that. But seriously? Just let me have my opinion that men are sexualized. Yes, women are sexualized too, but I'm bringing up men because that was my focus for my post. I don't need to put a footnote on the importance of addressing the patriarchy, sexism, and misogyny, and any other buzz words you threw out, into my post. I would expect that people here would already have some prior knowledge on the subject and assume that I wouldn't leave it out only that it just plainly digresses from my point. Yeah, Hollywood also obsess about heterosexual relationships, but I didn't bring it up. Why? It was OffTopic.

Also, you should really re-evaluate your post. Your tone comes off that you are justifying objectifying men because they deserve it, or something, because women are objectified. You probably don't actually mean to, but your post is just hard to wrap my head around. I didn't exactly bring up any radical ideas, just saying something that has been said thousands of times already on this forum alone.

queerofcups wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:54 pm

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:09 pm Wow. If you find my comparison and reasoning weak, I accept that. But seriously? Just let me have my opinion that men are sexualized. Yes, women are sexualized too, but I'm bringing up men because that was my focus for my post. I don't need to put a footnote on the importance of addressing the patriarchy, sexism, and misogyny, and any other buzz words you threw out, into my post. I would expect that people here would already have some prior knowledge on the subject and assume that I wouldn't leave it out only that it just plainly digresses from my point. Yeah, Hollywood also obsess about heterosexual relationships, but I didn't bring it up. Why? It was OffTopic.

Also, you should really re-evaluate your post. Your tone comes off that you are justifying objectifying men because they deserve it, or something, because women are objectified. You probably don't actually mean to, but your post is just hard to wrap my head around. I didn't exactly bring up any radical ideas, just saying something that has been said thousands of times already on this forum alone.

Oh word? Sexism is a buzzword now? When talking about sexualization and objectification we don't have to engage the fact that there are million dollar industries made off women's bodies? We don't have to talk about the fact that women objectifying men does not, in fact, function the same way men objectifying women does because uhhhh damn, guess I'm gonna use a buzzword again, sexism exists? Which was the point of my post. Well that's going to make talking about feitishization tough seeing as an actual conversation about it where people aren't just trying to show off how right they are deals with all sorts of buzzwords like homo/queerphobia, and community-building and political action/inaction, the policing of women's sexuality, the policing of queer young women's sexuality in particular, all that jazz.

But we wouldn't want that. I'll guess I'll just work on watching my tone. God forbid someone actually be upset about the erasure and demonization of a culture that's been important for them for so long.

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:04 pm

queerofcups wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:54 pm

000dia000 wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 4:09 pm Wow. If you find my comparison and reasoning weak, I accept that. But seriously? Just let me have my opinion that men are sexualized. Yes, women are sexualized too, but I'm bringing up men because that was my focus for my post. I don't need to put a footnote on the importance of addressing the patriarchy, sexism, and misogyny, and any other buzz words you threw out, into my post. I would expect that people here would already have some prior knowledge on the subject and assume that I wouldn't leave it out only that it just plainly digresses from my point. Yeah, Hollywood also obsess about heterosexual relationships, but I didn't bring it up. Why? It was OffTopic.

Also, you should really re-evaluate your post. Your tone comes off that you are justifying objectifying men because they deserve it, or something, because women are objectified. You probably don't actually mean to, but your post is just hard to wrap my head around. I didn't exactly bring up any radical ideas, just saying something that has been said thousands of times already on this forum alone.

Oh word? Sexism is a buzzword now? When talking about sexualization and objectification we don't have to engage the fact that there are million dollar industries made off women's bodies? We don't have to talk about the fact that women objectifying men does not, in fact, function the same way men objectifying women does because uhhhh damn, guess I'm gonna use a buzzword again, sexism exists? Which was the point of my post. Well that's going to make talking about feitishization tough seeing as an actual conversation about it where people aren't just trying to show off how right they are deals with all sorts of buzzwords like homo/queerphobia, and community-building and political action/inaction, the policing of women's sexuality, the policing of queer young women's sexuality in particular, all that jazz.

But we wouldn't want that. I'll guess I'll just work on watching my tone. God forbid someone actually be upset about the erasure and demonization of a culture that's been important for them for so long.

You know I'm on your side, right? I don't think you're wrong about what you say, but you seem to have taken this way too personally, so I'll just drop the discussion entirely.

onetruetrash wrote: Sun Oct 08, 2017 5:45 pm I agree with Katka and dia on this one. queerofcups, you seem to be saying that men are less sexualized than women because companies make millions off of women's bodies a year, but have you ever heard of magazines like Playgirl? Men and women are both sexualized, that's just a fact of life.