This [is] an account of the births of Adam: In the day of God’s preparing man, in the likeness of God He hath made him; 2a male and a female He hath prepared them, and He blesseth them, and calleth their name Man, in the day of their being prepared. Gen. 5:1 YLTMale and female. Man and wife are one flesh. Who would think that a married man has at least four legs. Without a doubt through the marriage the husband becomes both male and female biologically. (Could adultery relating to homosexuality as a fornicative act because the man's wife is one with the man ..thusly sex with the man's wife being sex with the man?) Anyway, key point, the male and female natures alluded to at Genesis contrast interestingly with notion of a "male-only god" without a mothering or female aspect. Mothering always seemed at the very least to be an extension of fathering or at least to go hand in hand.This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. Gen. 5:1 KJV
If one studies the terms 'he' and 'she' across languages, one might find the tendency to point to the active or passive or neutral role of a thing. A ship is a she (passively guided does not guide) or an it while a captain (a active role) would be a 'he'. The pen being a he because it 'writes' or participates in the inscribing the paper. Der spiegel (he) because it actively reflects. The feminist stir about 'gender bias' in language actually serves to conceal and confuse. Even a female-body-gendered captain in the sense of the activeness of the role of captain would be a 'he' regardless of the sexual gender of the one holding that office.
The Gnostic types speak of a woman becoming male or the like to enter heaven or whatever: however, when a femme gets married and joined to her husband and they become one...well that is pretty deep--why would female need to become male if female is one with male?