"Is it your sense that the mere existence of grammatical gender in romance languages is positively offensive? That it needs correction to obtain necessary political outcomes? Do you see how that could be a form of naked and lazy Anglo-chauvanism?"

Is that my sense, or is it the viewpoint of many of my native Spanish-speaking friends? You disagree with them, and they disagree with you. Language changes to reflect changes in society. Perhaps the real "laziness" is the failure of some to reflect on the necessity of language to change to accommodate new realities. I don't know you, but I'm willing to bet that you use a term other than "mankind" to refer to humanity or would refrain from using the derogatory term "homo," although three decades ago, it was much more common than "gay," and many presumed that it was just an unflattering descriptive word. And how about "LGBTQ+?" Just how recent is that coinage? Despite its newness, we expect people to employ it, except for those who haven't heard of it yet! The people who fail to adopt the new terms are considered the "lazy" ones (and they're lucky to be considered only "lazy.")

As much as I respect the Pew organization, we can't exactly call their polling "universal," now can we? As I said, let's see what a decade or two brings.