I don't think that it's any more Furry Confusion for a mouse or any other animal to have a pet dog than it is for a human to have a pet dog. I just think that it's Furry Confusion for any animal to have a member of its own species as a pet.
It's usually established in that situation that dogs would be furries too.
But aren't the "anthro" ones Dogfaces, while the "non-anthro" ones are just dogs.
That's different - Humans naturally can talk. Gideon wasn't mute, but Dopey was.
I thought Gideon was mute in the sense of "can't/doesn't use spoken language" that Dopey is mute. Figaro wasn't mute, but that may be a different subject.
So this settles not so much on the mere stance and that animals assume (bipedal, quadrupedal, or otherwise) as it does on how the animals are treated in the work. If a two-legged animal and a non-bipedal-stance-capable four-legged animal are treated on par with each other, then there is very little or hardly any Furry Confusion unless the two animals are of the same species.