My understanding of historical linguistics is that gendering in Indo-European languages has its roots in animate vs inanimate objects, with a feminine category

My understanding of historical linguistics is that gendering in Indo-European languages has its roots in animate vs inanimate objects, with a feminine category splitting later on from the animate category (possibly as a way to distinguish singular from collective initially, before being retrofitted to « female » things later on). Add on nouns shifting meaning over time and you've got a relationship between grammar and sex that is extremely loose. I'd take any notion that it « influences attitude » with extreme carefulness.