Yes, and I was simply observing that that's not how it is in English.
If that is so, than is a tad confusing:
So you were just considering the gender of words that have gender that does not correspond to the sex of the person or animal; such words are not common in most languages, but a few remain in English; although most have been tossed out are uselessor inane.
If things/people are conceptually gendered in a culture, then the language will have ways to refer to that. English has gendered pronouns, and gendered suffixes, yes. Grammatical gender is related, but different:
It means that gender is encoded in the grammar. For example, the German noun-system has three genders: neuter, feminine and masculine. Every noun has to fall into one of these categories or you'll run into problems when you're trying to use it (which sometimes happens when you try to use foreign nouns).
Adjectives don't have gender. They inflect for gender, and the relevant gender is the gender of the noun they modify.
Grammatical gender and cultural gender can have complex interplay. A real life example from my own language use (I'm a native speaker of German):
In German the noun for girl is "Mädchen". Because of the diminutive suffix "-chen", the word is neuter. This does not mean that I think of girls as genderless. However, grammar forces me to treat the noun as such.
Now, here's the interesting thing. Because the noun "Mädchen" is neuter, it requires a neuter article "Das Mädchen", rather than "Die Mädchen." I find "das Mädchen" absolutely unexceptional. It's how the language is. It doesn't bother me at all. I recoil from "die Mädchen". It feels just wrong. So far as expected, but:
Grammar also suggests I should use the neuter pronoun "es" rather than "sie", when referring to the noun. And I can't stand that. I naturally use "sie" (the feminine pronoun), and I actively resist using "es". "Es" looks wrong (even though it's perfectly grammatical, and logically the only correct way to speak) to me.
To summarise: I recoil from referring to "Das Mädchen" as "es". I accept grammatical gender when it comes to articles, but not when it comes to pronouns? Why? What's the difference?
I'm not sure I'd consider ships getting feminine pronouns as an instance of grammatical gender. I tend to think of this more as instances of personification (like how the sun can be masculine in poetry).
What both the ship-example and the Mädchen-example have in common is that they're about pronouns, and I think it might be a question of reference: people may sometimes override grammatical gender for conceptual gender in pronoun reference (as I do when I refer to a "Mädchen" as "sie", while I'd always refer to a "Bübchen" [diminutive for boy] as "es"). I think the same goes for ships and feminine pronouns or personification in poetry. Which is why I think pronoun-substitution is less useful as evidence for grammatical gender than articles or nominal/adjectival inflection.
Suffixes that specifically express gender (-or/-ress) express cultural gender not grammatical gender. To what extent grammatical gender expresses cultural gender is an interesting topic in its own right. But to ask that question we must keep the concepts separate, at least analytically.