The fact that a feminine and masculine noun class exist in several languages means virtually nothing from a non-linguistic point of view, as said noun classes don’t have anything to say about said objects inherent femininity or masculinity.
If grammatical gender had anything to say about gender as a social construct, all languages would employ a basic grammatical gender system with a feminine, a masculine and a neuter case, but as we all know, this is not the, for a lack of a better word, case.
English has no grammatical gender, German has three grammatical genders, Swedish has two genders, neither being feminine or masculine, but rather common and neuter and then there are loads of languages who completely fuck with the gender = grammatical gender misconception.
Basque has two genders, based on animacy, the Oluganda of Uganda use ten grammatical noun classes (which is by far a better term for grammatical gender), one which is for liquids and one which is for pejoratives and Zwahili employs 18 different noun classes.
And in Dyirbal, an Australian Aboriginal language, the feminine noun class includes not only actual women, but also water, fire and powerful, dangerous things.
Algonquian languages also have animate and inanimate genders, although some things that aren’t humans or animals still belong to the animate gender.
A helpful way to remember that grammatical gender has nothing to do with sex is that the etymology of gender is related to genre and originally refers to simply a type or a kind. The grammatical meaning is in fact the older meaning, according to Etymonline.