Vayikra and gender

Torah: A Woman's Commentary, p.573

male without blemish. It is not clear what the animal's sex symbolizes. Nicole Ruane, who examines the sacrificial system with regard to the sex of its victims, concludes that the hightest level of holiness is symbolized in Leviticus by perfect masculinity. Femininity can express graduations away from the ideal (Sacrifice, Purity and Gender in Priestly Law).

Bekhorot 6:12…as quoted in Torah Queeries

By reason of the following blemishes firstborn animals may not be slaughtered either in the Temple or in the provinces: if it has white specks or rheum in the eye that are not lasting…or if it is a tumtum or an androginos; such may not be slaughtered either in the Temple of in the provinces. Rabbi Ishmael says: No blemish is greater than this. But the Sages say: It does not count as a firstborn animal but may be shorn and used for labor.”

According to Classical Jewish teachings, there are 6 genders

1. Male
2. Female
3. Androgynos- both male and female characteristics
4. Tumtum – neither male or female organs/appearance
5. Saris – a eunich, by birth or human intervention, or person who was assigned male at birth but became feminized)
6. Aylonit – assigned female at birth, barren, seems to resemble man

Bava Batra 140b:7-8

The mishna states that the males direct the tumtum to the females. The Gemara asks: Does this mean that they direct him, and he takes sustenance like a daughter? Isn’t it taught in the latter clause of the mishna that if one said that either his male or female child will receive a certain sum once his wife gives birth, and she gave birth to a tumtum, the tumtum does not receive anything? This indicates that the tumtum does not have the rights of a female. Abaye says: The mishna means that they direct him to the females, but he has no rights to sustenance.

And Rava says: They direct him to the females and he has a right to sustenance. And with regard to the latter clause of the mishna, which grants the tumtum nothing at all, there we arrive at the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as it is taught in a mishna (Temura 24b): If one consecrates a firstborn animal while it is still a fetus, stating that if it is male it shall be a burnt-offering and if it is female it shall be a peace-offering, and the mother gave birth to a tumtum or a hermaphrodite [androginos], Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: It is not imbued with sanctity, as it is neither male nor female. So too, in the case discussed in the mishna here, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel maintains that the tumtum receives nothing, as he is considered to be a distinct entity of indeterminate sex, neither male nor female.

Mishnah Chagiga 1:1

All are obligated in seeing [the Temple Mount], except for a deaf-mute, a shoteh, or a minor; a Tumtum [person with recessed sexual organs whose gender is therefore impossible to determine, presently, by external examination. It is halachically uncertain whether such a person is male or female], an Androginos [person with both male and female sexual organs. It is halachically uncertain whether such a person is male, female or, perhaps, has a uniquely defined halachic gender.]; women, unfreed slaves; a lame person, a blind person, or a sick person; or an old person who cannot stand upon his feet.

Rabbi Sarah Lev, How the Aylonit Got Her Sex

I posit that the ’aylonit essentially receives her sex/gender assignment from her parallel, the natural eunuch. I reach this conclusion by demonstrating that the aggregate simanim (signs) of the ’aylonit are chosen specifically for their sex/gender-crossing attributes, fitting neither any known modern condition nor any ancient condition. Given that in the legal material the rabbis do not, in fact, understand the ’aylonit as a sex/gender crosser, the list of attributes seems to emerge from nowhere. The answer to the riddle of its origin is to be found in the text describing the seris ḥammah (the congenital eunuch, whose description parallels that of the ’aylonit in many ways). That is, the simanim of the seris ḥammah also present him as a sex/gender crossover despite the lack of supporting halakhic literature. But whereas the ’aylonit has no ancient corollary in the Greek and Roman literature, the attributes of the seris ḥammah directly match those of the Roman eunuch, who does appear in many of the contemporaneous Christian and Roman materials as a sex/gender crosser. It would seem, then, that the seris ḥammah shares his sex/gender with the Roman eunuch, and the ’aylonit receives her sex/gender from her mirror image, the seris ḥammah .

Holding God Accountable for LGBT Marginalization by Noach Dzmura

We should hold God accountable for the errors of compulsory heterosexuality and the gender binary. These are not solely human errors, if God has anything at all to do with us....everything is God, what do we ask God to give us in reparation for Hir sin?

...I hear Hir making an offering for Hir redemption every time a community supports its LGBT members. God is adding one more small payment on the huge debt S/he has incurred every time a transgender person is acknowledged as belonging to the gender s/he claims. Every time a gay or lesbian couple in DC gets married. Every time a transgender child is allowed to dress in the clothing s/he chooses, God is doing tshuvah. S/he’s not off the hook yet, and S/he won’t be until every one of us is free, everywhere. S/he has a very long way to go. But I believe one day S/he will complete this tshuvah. And we must hold Hir to it by telling our stories, being out, living queer – and hence providing Hir with opportunities to move humans toward compassion.