The explanation is not unreasonable, but you have reasonable explanations for the masculine too. Wifi is a good counter-example: Fidelity is feminine, yet the m

The explanation is not unreasonable, but you have reasonable explanations for the masculine too. Wifi is a good counter-example: Fidelity is feminine, yet the masculine gender is widespread for Wifi. You can also justify the masculine form by metonymy (at the beginning of the pandemic we mostly said coronavirus, and we shifted to covid but kept the masculine of the former). If you'd like some background on this (in French): - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS3BfFPM3qI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS3BfFPM3qI (France Inter, short) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zykIohErTr8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zykIohErTr8 (short) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L78FkTtwKw4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L78FkTtwKw4 (Linguisticae, longer) In short: you cannot argue against the usage, even with the most logical explanation that goes against the usage. Natural languages are far from being formal, entirely consistent and completely logical.