Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site felix.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!hplabs!oliveb!felix!daver
From: daver@felix.UUCP (Dave Richards)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: "SO" is no good (new? topic)
Message-ID: <1006@felix.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 26-Mar-86 17:28:54 EST
Article-I.D.: felix.1006
Posted: Wed Mar 26 17:28:54 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Mar-86 04:38:10 EST
References: <267@parcvax.Xerox.COM>
Reply-To: daver@felix.UUCP (Dave Richards)
Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA
Lines: 41
Keywords: words definitions

In article <267@parcvax.Xerox.COM> lui@parcvax.Xerox.COM (Ken Lui) writes:
>
>I don't know about you folks, but I just can't bring myself to use a term
>coined by the government (census bureau?) when referring to the woman I
>love.  "Significant Other" and "Spouse Equivalent" make me choke.  "SO" is a
>petroleum bi-product, for Yafa's sake!
>
>But what word is better?  I would be comfortable with "lover" if people
>didn't always hang such a heavy sexual connotation on it.  What do I mean
>"people" ... even \I/ mistake "lover" to mean only "sex partner" sometimes
>(if someone tells me they are going to meet their lover for lunch, the first
>image that pops into my mind is a little daytime frolic!)
>
>Of course, "girlfriend" and "boyfriend" are too juvenile.  "Beau" and
>"belle" are too French for my taste.  Besides, I favor a word that is
>neutral with respect to gender.  SO has that advantage.
>
>In fact, SO has a lot of advantages: neutral gender, widely understood,
>vague enough to be accurate.  But it is such an UGLY term.  I'm talking
>esthetics here.
>
>I'd use "old lady" and "old man" if it weren't for the fact that she
>despises those terms.  I think they are appropriately irreverential.
>
>Currently, I favor "mate".  It's neutral for gender, and it describes the
>relationship well enough. Unfortunately, many people consider "mate"
>to mean "spouse".  And, of course, if we ever went to Australia
>we would be terribly confused.
>
>Anyone else have any ideas?  The term should be independent of gender,
>describe the relationship that "SO" is commonly used for, and be
>esthetically pleasing.
>
>Perry A. Caro

If you're living together, I see nothing wrong with "roommate'.  Of course
that gives no clue as to how close you are, or if you even talk to each
other!  Assuming you're very close and your lives are "intertwined" so to
speak, how about "my other half" (OH).

Dave