The author of the following article makes some fascinating points. The link to the actual article is here but since it looks like a root URL with constantly changing content, I've decided to C&P the text into my LiveJournal. I found it via a Witchvox thread, here, which has some interesting comments of its own.
I have no words for the depth of my indignation over this. The link is to the Wren's Nest Pagan news listing on the article (51 comments and counting), and the italicized text is an excerpt from the article itself:
Father's Day provides a fine opportunity to talk about our Father in Heaven. Why do Judeo-Christian religions insist on God being a father and not a mother? Is it still important to use masculine images and vocabulary to describe God? Or is that all a vestige of sexist religion?
That is the charge of "progressives" within Christianity and Judaism. Because men and women are equal, their argument goes, describing God, the highest being, in male terms is pure sexism. It simply discriminates against women and places men in a superior position. These arguments have great appeal in an age that confuses equality with sameness. So it is worth briefly sketching some of the arguments for preserving male depictions of God.
First, God is the source of moral rules. As the feminist thinker Carole Gilligan argued years ago, men think more in terms of rules, and women think more in terms of feelings/compassion/ intuition. There is a great human need for both. But, first and foremost, the Judeo-Christian God is a moral ruler (giver of moral rules and moral judge of humanity), and neither men nor women want to be given rules or ruled by a woman. For both men and women, the masculine image carries an authority that the feminine one does not.
I hate having the flu -- it ramps my emotional responses in all directions. *snarl*