T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
129.1 | | CSSE32::PHILPOTT | CSSE/Lang. & Tools, ZK02-1/N71 | Thu Dec 11 1986 11:15 | 9 |
|
It certainly sounds nicer than SO, mainly because I hate acronyms...
It looks like a nasty cross between latin and french to me though,
and I'm not sure it is gender free. I wonder if like 'blond' and
'blonde' there are male and female forms of 'vivant' (vivant and
vivante perhaps?)
/. Ian .\
|
129.2 | Vivante... | CSC32::JOHNS | | Thu Dec 11 1986 18:26 | 8 |
| Yes, there is. A female would be a vivante or co-vivante, or whatever.
Wouldn't this word also imply that the people were living together?
Since sometimes people in relationships don't live together, I would
think they would prefer SO, but I could be wrong.
SO does seem vague, but I think that's what it was meant to be.
Carol
|
129.4 | I love it! | ARGUS::CORWIN | Jill Corwin | Fri Dec 12 1986 16:07 | 11 |
| Rita,
I love it! After seeing you use it once, I fell in love with the word.
One of the advantages I saw when I became engaged was that I hated the
word "boyfriend" and didn't have to use it anymore. I've never liked SO
either, and although POSSLQ was cute, it still sounded contrived. I've
never had any problem with fiance (implied accent because some people don't
have fancy terminals :-)) but maybe I'll use covivant just to confuse people
(or impress them? :-)), or as a change of pace depending on circumstances.
Jill
|
129.5 | another suggestion | BARTOK::MEEHAN | | Tue Dec 16 1986 13:52 | 4 |
|
In last Sunday's New York Times Magazine there was a letter referring to
an earlier column by William Safire on the use of the term 'significant other'.
The writer of the letter suggested 'placemate' as a replacement.
|
129.6 | So far I like SO best | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | | Tue Dec 16 1986 14:17 | 12 |
|
Re .5, "placemate" sounds too much like placemat, which in turn
sounds too much like doormat.
I like the term SO. Boyfriend sounds too juvenile for people in
their 30's and 40's, and gentleman friend suggests people in their
80's at least.
Lorna
P.S. Co-vivant (is that it?) sounds too jet-settish for me.
|
129.7 | So is still the best available | SSDEVO::YOUNGER | Never believe anything until it's been officially denied | Tue Dec 16 1986 17:36 | 10 |
| I am not wild about the term SO, but it seems to suit the purpose
better than anything else I know of. Like .6, the term 'boyfriend'
seems too juvenile for anyone over 16, and 'gentleman friend' seems
to be a term useful for someone in their 80's. For those of us
in between who are not married, there seems to be little else.
I've never objected to being referred to as "my lady", but what
do I call him? "My man" sounds like it came out of 'Porgy and Bess',
"My gentleman" sounds like I'm using an escort service, and "my
lord" sounds like I'm his servant from the 1700s. Any other ideas?
|
129.8 | | RDGENG::LESLIE | reeling in the flickering light | Tue Dec 16 1986 19:04 | 3 |
| What is wrong with the term "lover" ?
It isn't sexist, doesn't assume gender and is accurate.
|
129.9 | "My Love" suits fine... | REGENT::MOZER | Joe Mozer | Tue Dec 16 1986 20:18 | 11 |
|
RE: .8
I think "lover" is a good alternative, although to many it would
suggest a sexual relationship exists, which may not always be the
case with an "SO". I personally don't have a problem with "SO",
or "love" (without the "r") is another way I've described my attachment
to a particular lady (when I have that feeling for them, of course).
"My love" also doesn't assume gender and isn't sexist in my book.
Joe
|
129.10 | words | CLT::BUTENHOF | Approachable Systems | Wed Dec 17 1986 10:54 | 27 |
| I've always liked "Lifemate", but I don't use it most of
the time because a lot of people don't seem to get it.
I don't like "lover"... that's gotten tossed around too much.
When you're tired of your spouse, you "take a lover", all
sorts of other connotations. It's become ambiguous. One
of the consequences of our society getting confused about
the distinction between "sex" and "love"... all too often
the latter is used to mean the former, and therefore becomes
an inadequate description of a relationship.
"co-vivant" has a nice ring to it, but again I suspect that
most peoples' immediate reaction would be "huh?" SO is at
least a little more common, though far from universal.
"Boyfriend" and "girlfriend" are sorta cute and juvenile
feeling, but my wife and I have been known to use them when
referring to each other. Depends on the impression you want to
give, and to whom you're talking. Sometimes "cute and juvenile"
is appropriate!
Mostly, we use "wife" and "husband" for description... even
before we actually got married. It has the advantage of
being almost universally understood... and, to most people
at least, gives a reasonably close image of our relationship.
/dave
|
129.11 | Maybe a picture???? | LYMPH::MUNSON | | Thu Dec 18 1986 12:51 | 11 |
|
My spouse, my husband, my friend, my honey, my gentleman, but most
frequently "my mate"...all of these are used, and all have different
nuances about the relationship. I just use "husband" when speaking
with people who probably wouldn't catch the more subtle stuff. Before
we got married, I used "mate" for those people. Confused a lot of 'em.
Surely there ought to be a word which indicates the affection, respect,
tolerance, love, and admiration I feel for this fellow....
Joanne
|
129.12 | mon soup du jour | KLAATU::THIBAULT | Swimmers Do It Wetter | Thu Dec 18 1986 12:58 | 5 |
| Personally I've never liked SO, boyfriend or any of that yuck. I
always prefer to use my "sweet baboo".
Bahama Mama
|
129.13 | Hello my baby, hello my honey, hello my... | HPSCAD::WALL | I see the middle kingdom... | Thu Dec 18 1986 15:02 | 6 |
|
"Someday someone will think of a name for it, dear."
"I'm in favor of a system of lapel pins, myself."
G. B. Trudeau
|
129.15 | | DINER::SHUBIN | Go ahead - make my lunch! | Thu Dec 18 1986 17:41 | 8 |
| Margaret referred to me as her "sweetie" in her reply to the party-invitation
note. I frequently just refer to her as "Margaret" and let people figure it
out.
Do people really use "significant other" or "SO" in speaking? It's one thing
to write it in a note, but I've never heard anyone actually say it.
-- hs
|
129.16 | But SO is so elegantly generic.... | TLE::BENOIT | Beth Benoit DTN 381-2074 | Fri Dec 19 1986 12:18 | 15 |
|
> Do people really use "significant other" or "SO" in speaking? It's one thing
> to write it in a note, but I've never heard anyone actually say it.
People certainly do use it! I have both used it in conversation and heard
it used.
By the way, the first time I heard the term was about 10 years ago from a
gay friend. I thought it was a delightful way out of her dilemma of how to
refer to her "girlfriend" without having to make a big production out of it.
The gay friends I have now are tickled pink that the term is coming into
general usage -- for exactly that reason. Using "lover" quickly becomes
a problem for them, since people inevitably want to know why they don't just
say "girlfriend" or "boyfriend".
|
129.17 | "SO" Even When Better Defined! | VAXUUM::DYER | Spot the Difference | Mon Jan 05 1987 01:00 | 3 |
| Fianc�(e) isn't good, even when it's true. Upon first hearing it, most people
ask when you're going to get married.
<_Jym_>
|