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