I didn't bring it in. You did when you referred to it as a male. I asked you before how you have come to believe that the being you believe in is a male. It's a simple question. Just a yes or a no will suffice.
Now tell me, is Jesus Christ the son of the god you speak of?
This is the common argument of a feminist (and for this reason is hard to accept the claims of the writer's as being a "man".)
While gender and sex are being confused as "the same", at the end of the day gender is not related at all with sexual relations.
When Glenn assumes the "sex of God" as "male", the funny combination of words really shows fanaticism over reasoning.
But lets play God as male.
God is not a sexual being, because same Jesus says that after resurrection humans will have no sex, this is to say, no sexual relations. This is a different kind of existence.
Then, why God is male?
Because God declared man -who is male- to be the leader, and woman -who is female- to be the follower, the companion, the subdued lover, washing clothes, cooking food, cleaning the house, changing baby's diapers, and all those things women were made for.
Then, without having a sexual life, because having Jesus was not thru sex relations, God, the leader, the almighty, declared himself as male, the Father.
Some people have doubts about God being "male" and they think that God "can be female as well", but they are wrong because in no place God identifies Himself as female, on the contrary, all the description of God in the bible always portrait Him as male.
So, sorry feminists, God is male, the Father, the man of war, the wise elderly man, the several attributes found in manly description.