Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site cca.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!cca!diego From: diego@cca.UUCP (Diego Gonzalez) Newsgroups: net.social Subject: An SO is . . .. Message-ID: <1339@cca.UUCP> Date: Wed, 16-Jan-85 12:04:16 EST Article-I.D.: cca.1339 Posted: Wed Jan 16 12:04:16 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 19-Jan-85 10:37:05 EST Organization: Computer Corp America, Cambridge Lines: 24 No, there's not a conspiracy (at least not a malicious one). An "SO", as used in this network, stands for "significant other." I know this only because a fellow I worked with a while back used to refer to his sweetheart by the latter term. While it gives a definite neutrality to expression, I personally find it lacks warmth (both SO and significant other). I mean imagine that the term catches on and winds up (gods forbid) in the final authority on everything (almost), the dictionary. When you think about the words themselves, it seems that they are actually an avoidance. Don't get me wrong(ly). Also feel that "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" emphasize immaturity and cast a diminishing sense on the relationship. An usually, we're not quite ready to discuss or introduce a person as a lover (although, in its broadest sense, it is probably the most accurate). Thus, people are reduced to usages that could refer to pets, plants, robots, or even cars. It's a matter of personal choice, I think. Get comfortable with the terms and expressions you use with and about your beloved. Let the world deal as best it can with that. Well you see, Marcel, this simple explanation is itself not so simple after all. I hope you're in love. diego@cca