>>51705022Yes, they mean what people collectively agree on. That's why there's thousands of different languages, and they all function, despite them all disagreeing on what word to use for the colour of the sky.
>>51705034I agree with this, actually, but my point is that clearly, people can't agree on what "furry" means. You might think it's very clear, but it's obvious from this semantic discussion and posts like
>>51703388 that many people don't. If 0.01% of English speakers don't agree on what an apple is, then yes, they're probably just insane and aren't affecting the language. But I'd contend that it's a much more significant fraction in this case. Even if we all accept it's "an anthropomorphic animal", where's the cutoff for that? Is Liru furry? Are Kemono friends furry? Is the Little Mermaid furry? You might have an answer to these questions, but I think if you were to ask them to a large group of people, there'd be quite some variance in the answers.
