Well, arguably the alternative to "fursona" would just be to say "persona," and to have the furry be understood from context. It's the same with most such words; a "fursuit" is what most people would call a "costume," and early furrydom got by for years calling them exactly that. You didn't need to say "furry costume," because if the costume was an anthropomorphic tiger, you kinda figured it out without the adjective. (I'm pretty sure they were still calling them "costumes" through most of ConFurence's run.)
"Fursona" and "fursuit" and using "paw" as a verb and our incessant love of puns on the word fur in general are largely tribal signifiers. I've seen others give IMVU the hairy eyeball for using "furrific," but my suspicion is that the reaction doesn't stem from a judgement about its language utility compared with other furry fanspeak. It comes from a but you're not one of us reaction.
Well, arguably the alternative to "fursona" would just be to say "persona," and to have the furry be understood from context. It's the same with most such words; a "fursuit" is what most people would call a "costume," and early furrydom got by for years calling them exactly that. You didn't need to say "furry costume," because if the costume was an anthropomorphic tiger, you kinda figured it out without the adjective. (I'm pretty sure they were still calling them "costumes" through most of ConFurence's run.)
"Fursona" and "fursuit" and using "paw" as a verb and our incessant love of puns on the word fur in general are largely tribal signifiers. I've seen others give IMVU the hairy eyeball for using "furrific," but my suspicion is that the reaction doesn't stem from a judgement about its language utility compared with other furry fanspeak. It comes from a but you're not one of us reaction.
— Chipotle