Is Infertility A Separate Gender for the Rabbis? A Look at the אילונית and סריס [Talmud Tuesday]

by Drew Kaplan · Published December 22, 2015 · Updated December 22, 2015

Is sterility really a separate gender for the rabbis of the Talmud?

In this week’s issue of the Jewish Journal, there were not one, but two references to gender in rabbinic literature(!), which is certainly exciting that rabbinic literature is getting some attention in Jewish newspapers. However, I found the description of gender in rabbinic literature to be disturbingly erroneous.

In a letter to the editor, one reader described the rabbis as having

recognized a variety of gender identities. In addition to zakhar (male) and nekeivah (female), these categories include androginos, a person with both male and female sexual characteristics; tumtum, a person whose sexual characteristics are indeterminate; aylonit, a person who is identified as female at birth but develops male characteristics at puberty and is infertile; saris, a person who is identified as male at birth but develops female characteristics at puberty and/or is lacking a penis, either naturally or through human intervention.¹

And, in an opinion piece, three authors combined to write the following

The rabbis of the Talmud understood that human gender is infinitely more diverse than the gender binary. Talmudic discourse over the generations identifies various categories of people who, according to their descriptions in the text, would today fall under the broad umbrella of “transgender.” These include the tumtum (someone with hidden or underdeveloped genitalia), the androgynos (a person with male and female sex organs), the eylonit (a masculine woman) and the saris (a feminine man).²

While I hope to, someday discuss the instances of one whose genitalia are hidden (טומטום) and one who has both male and female sex organs (אנדרוגינוס), my focus in this piece will be on the סריס (seris) and the אילונית (eylonit). So, what are they?

There is a beraita, which I think is helpful to consider in this matter (bYevamot 80a):

בן עשרים שנה ולא הביא שתי שערות – יביאו ראיה שהוא בן עשרים והוא הסריס לא חולץ ולא מייבם
בת עשרים ולא הביאה שתי שערות – יביאו ראיה שהיא בת עשרים והיא האילונית לא חולצת ולא מתייבמת, דברי בית הלל ובית שמאי אומרים זה וזה בני שמנה עשרה
רבי אליעזר אומר הזכר כדברי בית הלל ונקבה כדברי בית שמאי מפני שהאשה ממהרת לבא לפני האיש

“A twenty-year old man who has not produced two hairs, they must bring evidence that he is twenty years of age and he, being confirmed as sterile/impotent – neither submits to the shoe-untying ceremony to refuse the levirate marriage, nor performs the levirate marriage.
If the woman (to be married by levirate marriage) at the age of twenty did not produce two hairs, they must bring evidence that she is twenty years of age and she, being confirmed as sterile, neither takes part in the shoe-untying ceremony to be refused of levirate marriage, nor is taken in levirate marriage”, the words of Hillel’s Academy.
And Shammai’s Academy says: “This and this at eighteen years old.”
Rabbi Eliezer says: “The male – according to the words of Hillel’s Academy; and the female according to the words of Shammai’s Academy, since the woman matures earlier than a man.”

In this tannaitic text, we see numerous things regarding the סריס (seris) and the אילונית (eylonit), beginning with the conflation of gendered terms regarding them. The סריס (seris) is a sterile/impotent man, while the אילונית (eylonit) is a sterile woman. And, interestingly, Rabbi Eliezer even conflates their sex (male/female) with their genders. From this text, we certainly see no indication that the אילונית (eylonit) is a masculine woman or that the סריס (seris) is a feminine man – they are simply sterile, with nothing particularly ascribed to their femininity nor masculinity.

For more on this topic, there is another beraita, which I think is helpful to consider in this matter (bYevamot 80b):

איזהו סריס חמה כל שהוא בן עשרים ולא הביא שתי שערות ואפילו הביא לאחר מכאן הרי הוא כסריס לכל דבריו ואלו הן סימניו כל שאין לו זקן ושערו לקוי ובשרו מחליק
רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר משום רבי יהודה בן יאיר כל שאין מימיו מעלין רתיחות
ויש אומרים כל המטיל מים ואין עושה כיפה
ויש אומרים כל ששכבת זרעו דוחה
ויש אומרים כל שאין מימי רגליו מחמיצין
אחרים אומרים כל שרוחץ בימות הגשמים ואין בשרו מעלה הבל
רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר כל שקולו לקוי ואין ניכר בין איש לאשה

ואיזו היא אילונית כל שהיא בת עשרים ולא הביאה ב’ שערות ואפי’ הביאה לאחר מכאן הרי היא כאילונית לכל דבריה ואלו הן סימניה כל שאין לה דדים ומתקשה בשעת תשמיש
רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר כל שאין לה שיפולי מעים כנשים
רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר כל שקולה עבה ואינה ניכרת בין אשה לאיש

Which is a seris of the sun?
Any person who is twenty years of age and has not produced two pubic hairs. And even if he produced them afterwards he is deemed to be a seris in all respects. And these are his characteristics: He has no beard, his hair is lank, and his skin is smooth.
Rabban Shimon, son of Gamliel, said from the name of Rabbi Yehudah, son of Ya’ir: “Any person whose urine produces no froth.”
And some say: “He who urinates without forming an arch.”
And some say: “He whose semen is watery.”
And some say: “He whose urine does not ferment.”
Others say: “He whose body does not steam after bathing in the winter season.”
Rabbi Shim’on, son of Elazar, says: “He whose voice is abnormal so that one cannot distinguish whether it is that of a man or of a woman.”

What is a eylonit?
Any woman who is twenty years of age and has not produced two pubic hairs. And even if she produces them afterwards, she is deemed to be a woman incapable of procreation in all respects. And these are her characteristics: She has no breasts and suffers pain during copulation.
Rabban Shimon, son of Gamliel, says: “One who has no mons veneris like other women.”
Rabbi Shim’on, son of Elazar, says: “One whose voice is deep so that one cannot distinguish whether it is that of a man or of a woman.”

In this text, we see that both the אילונית (eylonit) and the סריס (seris) are being considered here with regards to the lack of their sexual characteristics. Now, the astute observer will notice that Rabbi Shim’on, son of Elazar, does consider their voices to be of indistinct gender. Inasmuch as one’s voice could be of indeterminate gender, this sounds like more of a physiological matter than a gender matter, per se.
Furthermore,

Both the issue of eunuchs and of bodily defects suggest that categories of a “feminine man” and a “masculine woman” were foreign to the rabbis, and that sexual identity was for them not a hidden mystery to be disclosed by means of the science of physiognomy, but the product of a simple distinction between sexual organs. The whole project of defining levels of feminization based on a model of gender fluidity was foreign to their gender economy.³

For what it’s worth, later on in the Talmud, an amora describes an אילונית (eylonit) (bKetubot 10b-11a):

אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק אף אנו נאמר איילונית דוכרנית דלא ילדה

Rav Nahman, son of Yizhak, said: “We even describe an eylonit as a ram-like/unchaste woman who does not give birth.”

Not that I’m sure what to do with that text, but it does not try to masculinize the אילונית (eylonit).

In response to the pieces which appear in this week’s issue of the Jewish Journal, I think the following responds well to the claims about the terms under consideration here:

Ultimately, the saris and the ailonit as halakhic categories are perceived as either man or woman via their primary sexual organs, and ambiguous gender signs are read as merely secondary indicators as to their ability to reproduce. They are, in fact, not distinct genders, but are men or women who cannot reproduce, a defect that is significant only in the context of the laws of marriage.⁴

In sum, it is utterly clear that the אילונית (eylonit) and the סריס (seris) are not separate genders for the rabbis of the Talmud, rather, they are legal categories for the purposes of marriage. Let’s treat them appropriately.

1. Nikki Chayim, letter to editor, Jewish Journal (18-24 December 2015), 7. {Available online here}↩
2. Idit Klein, Rabbi Yechiel Hoffman, and B. Andrew Zelermyer, “Why Transgender Inclusion is a Jewish Imperative”, Jewish Journal (18-24 December 2015), 12. {Available online here}^↩
3. Ishay Rosen-Zvi, “The Rise and Fall of Rabbinic Masculinity”, Jewish Studies Internet Journal 12 (2013), 18 [http://www.biu.ac.il/JS/JSIJ/12-2013/Rosen-Zvi.pdf].^↩
4. Charlotte Elisheva Fonrobert, “Gender Identity In Halakhic Discourse”, Jewish Women: A Comprehensive Historical Encyclopedia | Jewish Women’s Archive (1 March 2009) [http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/gender-identity-in-halakhic-discourse].↩