"I do not believe that the Christ had
just a male perspective; indeed all his works show the opposite."
Indeed. But your original question had to do with human usage of images/objects designed to designate a Christian. You're changing focus entirely here.
Jesus did not indicate how he wished Christians to identify themselves as such - except love one another as he loved his own. He offered no badges of any sort.
As for your tiredness with written texts, I'm afraid that's about all we have to go on. Your original question (about using an alleged male symbol rather than a femaile one) falls into the realm of psychological anthropology or art criticism, about which much has been written and for which there may be a list. I personally am a Jungian and sympathize with your position to an extent. But as any of the real historians/theologians (I am not in the mix) on this list will tell you, an argument based on what's not there is risky indeed.