Comment

Out of curiosity, would you say My pronouns are neopronouns? I use capitalised pronouns too. And I’m also a god. Not a capital-G god, just a regular polytheistic kind. Does the acceptance of our current society play a role in whether they’re neopronouns? Are they new when I use them, and old when Deus uses them?

source

Sort:hotnew top

ayyy@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
You need serious help

source
- Grail@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  Thank you. You’re welcome to join the soulist movement and help Me overthrow realism. soulism.net
  
  source
  - ayyy@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    …wikipedia.org/…/Narcissistic_personality_disorde…
    
    source
    Grail@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    medium.com/…/anarcho-narcissism-b647c8062173
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- yeather@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  Wine is cheaper than therapy.
  
  source
kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
Newness is the quality of having been recently created or having started existing recently. The deific pronouns surely came before the standard canon of human/mortal pronouns, just as their subject deities predate humanity, perhaps both having always existed. It doesn’t have anything to do with societal acceptance.

source
- candybrie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  Uh, pronouns are just words. They don’t have some innate quality that means they had to exist when the entities those pronouns describe began. He/Him is likely about as old as he/him.
  
  source
  - kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    The original post described them as neopronouns, which is a category of pronouns that have arisen recently due to changes in how we understand and descrive gender. Pronouns like xe/xer, for example. The pronouns for a timeless being that predates humanity would hardly be “new” by any standard. I was having fun with the idea they would be old or eternal pronouns by comparison to Humanity’s pronouns. You took the joke too seriously.
    
    source