diego@cca.UUCP (Diego Gonzalez) (01/16/85)
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
fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) (01/20/85)
In article <cca.1339> diego@cca.UUCP (Diego Gonzalez) writes (I edited it down): > >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). > >When you think about the words themselves, it seems that they are >actually an avoidance. And 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. > I agree. Many people in our lives are significant others, e.g. our friends, teachers, parents, children, etc. Some netters have jokingly declared that SO stands for "Sex Object". I think this is actually the more accurate interpretation. When you think about it, what else differentiates your SO from all the other important people in your life?
brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard Brower) (01/22/85)
In article <1339@cca.UUCP> diego@cca.UUCP (Diego Gonzalez) writes: >While it gives a definite neutrality to >expression, I personally find it lacks warmth (both SO and significant >other). > >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). Actually, sometimes I use the term "SO" or "significant other" to be a useful dodge when speaking to someone that I do not know very well. Of course, I use boyfriend and/or lover for those whom I do know and have some amount of trust in. After all, there are still lots of gays being killed by intolerent a**holes, and I don't want to be just a statistic. -- Richard A. Brower Fortune Systems {ihnp4,ucbvax!amd,hpda,sri-unix,harpo}!fortune!brower