From: "Tristan McLeay" <kesuari@...>
> Muke Tever wrote:
> >I would say 'mate', which is essentially a less sterile equivalent to
'spouse'
> >and blind to actual marital status, but I dont know how common that use of
the
> >word is among nonfurs.
>
> I've had plenty of people that I'd call my mates (at the same time,
> even) and not been attracted to them :) (Indeed, if you were having a
> Relationship with someone Down Under, you probably wouldn't call them
> your mate... unless we're talking about animals.
[snip]
> (And I've made the assumption here that nonfurs==straight. If it means
> nongay, my comments still hold though. In fact, if it means tomato, my
> comments still hold, they might just seem a little out of context.)
http://www.tigerden.com/infopage/furry/furfaq.txt
Among such people animal-centered terms are common (one I hear a lot lately is
'paws' for 'hands').
*Muke!
--
http://www.frath.net/