I used to as well until I looked into it, which is why I now know way, way more than anyone really needs to (there is… a lot.) Anyway, figured I’d explain just in case. You didn’t seem like you had bad intentions, so thanks for being understanding.
A furry is someone that identifies with anthropomorphic animal characters (or sometimes just animal characteristics). No dressing up required. Now, a lot of the people that go to cons tend to have more money, so you will see more fursuits and such, but most furries do not dress up.
You are right, but a lot of the roots of furry criticism do tend to be queerphobic in origin. It’s just something to recognize.
I’m using kink in a pretty generic way because a lot of the criticisms of furries relate to sex (e.g. beastiality or pedophilia), and thus any depiction of kink (like bondage gear) is used to demonize them that it’s a fetish (and one that is coming for your children.)
There is a significantly higher proportion of LGBTQ+ representation within the furry community than the general populace, and it makes sense why. Fursonas are another way to explore sexual and gender identities in a safe way, and furry communities tend to be pretty accepting places.
This is just my opinion, but I see kink in the furry community criticized the same way I see kink at Pride events criticized.
Is it actually incorrect? I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong, but it just sounds bizarre or Shakespearean if you use it when it’s not an auxiliary verb.
“I’ve no need for that.” is a perfectly cromulent sentence.
I’m not sure I understand how that applies here or changes what I posted.