Shad in Hebrew means "breast", always has, and is used as such multiple times."
And is one of dozens that starts with the part Shad all but one point to things other than breast.
Shad is also derives from a shuwd(according to Strong's) which is defined as
"שׁוּד shûwd, shood; a primitive root; properly, to swell up, i.e. figuratively (by implication of insolence) to devastate: -- waste."
Your own source admits that the traditional and over 2000 year old translation says it is not breast and instead they just say but in one verse that speaks of blessing and includes that of breasts and womb which is not literal and the creation of man and woman easily encapsulates this usage.
The full context includes
"22 "Yosef is a fruitful plant, a fruitful plant by a spring, with branches climbing over the wall. 23 The archers attacked him fiercely, shooting at him and pressing him hard; 24 but his bow remained taut; and his arms were made nimble by the hands of the Mighty One of Ya'akov, from there, from the Shepherd, the Stone of Isra'el, 25 by the God of your father, who will help you, by El Shaddai, who will bless you with blessings from heaven above, or: that says beautiful words. blessings from the deep, lying below, blessings from the breasts and the womb. "
Yet it ignores its use in non gender required or in the masculine. Never mind ignoring the previous name given of mighty one of Jacob.
Again context matters.
One time your source takes it out of context and ignores thousands of years as the definition given of Almighty God, or in some peoples take, thunderous God.
It also ignores the countless times God is spoken of as Father even by the Son himself. So again you have at best one very loose translation assuming a similar word but not the word it was derived from or the dozens of other similar words that contradicts the usage in the verse earlier or at least does not coincide with it as the proof and only in that one specific usage as no other usage lends itself to that.
Your claim was that Christianity does not gender God yet the vast, vast majority believes in God the father thus you are wrong even if your small sect tries to degender the bible. The majority decides the belief system that is associated with it, not your splinter group. The holy trinity is key to Christianity including Catholicism.
"And Paul said that there is in Christ, " no male or female". "
Yes, we are all equal, that does not remove gender obviously. The verse being Galatians 3:28.
But again, gender is not actually important, as i said it is not a requirement for a supernatural being.
Personally i don't think God is 100% male or female because there is no need, but his identity and presence aligns closer with the masculine then feminine, traditionally and generaly speaking.