Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 Fluke 8/7/84; site fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!fluke!joe
From: joe@fluke.UUCP (Joe Kelsey)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: net.singles acronym definitions...
Message-ID: <1816@vax4.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Sep-84 13:41:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: vax4.1816
Posted: Thu Sep  6 13:41:07 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Sep-84 11:49:31 EDT
References: <1052@pucc-h> <4@tikal.UUCP>
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Everett, WA
Lines: 90

Way back in the dark ages when this newsgroup started, the *original*
reference to MOTAS had A = *appropriate*.  It was originally coined in
an article which explored all of the various combinations one could
produce from MOT*S, replacing the * with one or more letters depending
on how many letters it takes to describe the preferred sex (also
depending on how many different sexes or sexualities you are willing to
allow).  Also, there are several other acronyms which appear from time
to time, notably posslq and SO.  SO seems to have finally won the
battle with posslq for "how do you describe the person you live with in
an intimate, meaningful relationship possibly outside of marrige".
posslq derived from a 1970 census form which had a classification for
"persons of opposite sex sharing living quarters", but is restrictive
in the same way MOTOS is restrictive - it assumes a heterosexual
orientation.  SO stands for "significant other" and is the shortest
description which seems to cover the widest possibilities: living
together, dating, married, hetero, homo, bi, etc.

I always enjoy reading what everyone *thinks* some acronym stands for,
especially since some of the guesses are pretty wild (see the "grep"
discussion in unix-wizards!)

While we're at it, I'll dig into the old archives for this poem by
Charles Curalt, inspired by the term "posslq":

> From: fluke!microsof!uw-beave!cornell!vax135!ariel!hou5f!npoiv!harpo!seismo!rlgvax!rick
> Newsgroups: net.nlang,net.singles
> Title: posslq
> Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1149
> Posted: Mon Mar  7 14:33:08 1983
> Received: Tue Mar  8 06:35:35 1983
> 
> 			POSSLQ
> 
> Rich as it is, the English language does not have a word for everything.
> For example, for years now it's been evident that there is not a good
> word to describe, much less introduce - at a party, say - the person with
> whom one is living. One's roommate, as it were, of the opposite sex with
> whom one has not exchanged maritial vows. How does a young woman introduce
> 0eorge?  My lover, George?  No that's out.  My boyfriend?  Definitely dated.
> My friend? My Fiance? No  friend is ambiguous, and fiance suggests an
> engagement, which may or may be applicable.
> 
> We haven't had a good word for a partner in such a relationship - until now.
> Someone found it, looking at some forms put out by the U. S. Bureau of the
> Census.  There, as an acronoym for "Persons of Opposite Sex Sharing Living
> Quarters" was the word P-O-S-S-L-Q Posslq, the very word we've been looking
> for.  Precise, to the point, and so much more business-like than, say, honey
> bunch or sweet potato pie.  You can say, without so much as a blush. "This is
> Dede, my posslq".  Or, "Say hello to Franklin. We're posslqs."
> 
> Language, like nature, abhors a vacumm; and since there has been no good word
> to cover this situation that used to be known as "living in sin," the folks
> over at the Census Bureau are making what is sure to be an invaluable
> contribution to our vocabulary - Posslq: person of opposite sex sharing
> living quarters. So simple. So non-judgemental. And in its own way, sort of
> poetic too.
> 
> 		Come live with me and be my love,
> 		And we will some now pleasures prove
> 		Of golden sands and crystal brooks
> 		With silken lines and silver hooks.
> 		There's nothing that I wouldn't do
> 		If you would be my posslq.
> 		You live with me, and I with you,
> 		And you will be my posslq.
> 		I'll be your friend and so much more;
> 		That's what a posslq is for.
> 
> 		And everything we will confess;
> 		Yes, even to the IRS.
> 		Some day on what we both may earn,
> 		Perhaps we'll file a joint return.
> 		You'll share my pad, my taxes, joint;
> 		You'll share my life - up to a point!
> 		And that you'll be so glad to do,
> 		Because you'll be my posslq.
> 		Come live with me and be my love,
> 		And share the pain and pleasure of
> 		The blessed continuity,
> 		Official posslqity;
> 		And I will whisper in your ear
> 		That word you love so much to hear.
> 		And love will stay forever new,
> 		If you will be my posslq.
> 

Well, I guess this is already too long.  While we're here, I'll just
throw in my two-cents on the make-up/hair debate:  If it feels good -
do it!

/Joe