Previous GIL removal attempts hurts single thread performance and it isn't that scalable, so people are usually by default dismissive.
Most of Python codes depend on subtle details of CPython internal. For example sometimes it is just convenient to assume GIL exists (i.e. simplifies concurrency codes because "you know there are at most one thread running").
I haven't seen any appetite to even consider solutions that break the promises of the GIL and make currently atomic things non-atomic, so that second argument seems weird.
Most of Python codes depend on subtle details of CPython internal. For example sometimes it is just convenient to assume GIL exists (i.e. simplifies concurrency codes because "you know there are at most one thread running").