I can’t claim to be any kind of expert on the Trinity, and mean no offense to anyone - but the idea of assigning a human sex to God just seems ludicrous. No graven images, and all that.
You could argue in metaphors - God as giver of life is ‘woman like’ (of course it takes both sexes to create life among mammals and most plants); while the Bible does refer to Him in the masculine pronoun.
But to say “God is a Man” or “God is a woman” is, imo, to minimize the nature of God. Man and woman is neither omniscient, omnipresent, nor omnipotent. If someone wants to create a religion that worships man or woman (and some like this have existed over the ages) that’s their free will. But I don’t quite understand how someone can be ordained in a religion and then subvert its main tenets. It’s leftism - they are never content with their own beliefs, they must destroy alternative beliefs and impose their beliefs on everyone else.
Live and let live is dead.
Virtually all references to God are that of “Father” or “him” - concepts He created.
Jesus revealed the Father to his disciples — not the mother, not the indeterminate what-you-will.
However, Jesus, in addition to being divine, also had a human nature: he was (humanly speaking) male, and always will be. Even His glorified body is male, because it's Him, Jesus.
He called the First Person of the Trinity "Father" 255 times. That should tell you something.
I'm not saying it's all clear, nor that it's at all limited to what humans (and animals) know of sexual dimorphism for reproductive purposes.
But I don't see how sex-linked words and concepts could be irrelevant. Surely they're part of the message.
You are both right and wrong.
You are right that God is not a man (male or female); man (male and female) was created in HIS image, not the other way around.
You are wrong that God has no male property by which He has basis to call Himself “He.” He refers to Himself in male terms throughout scripture, excepting as has been previously noted, some references to The Holy Spirit that I have not cataloged being not expressly male. God speaking prior to the First Advent of Christ speaks of Christ as “he.” Jesus speaking of God in the New Testament calls him “He.” The maleness of God is ubiquitous, though how it is expressed in the Person of the Divine remains mysterious to us, for we bear only his image, and that is sufficient; to bear His fullness is beyond our natural capacity.
The truth that St. Paul elucidated about there being “neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek (Gentile), slave nor free”; and Jesus’ own declaration that — in Heaven — mankind “neither marry nor are given in marriage,” but shall be as the angels — neither of these truths about physical gender obviate the eternal existence of “maleness” and “femaleness”; manifestations of which would continue, rightly, to be called “he” and “she.”