Kiddushin 35B

איש, דבר מצות ⁠– אין, אשה ⁠– לא. ואי אשמעינן הא: משום דאיכא איבוד נשמה חס רחמנא עלה, אבל הנך תרתי ⁠– אימא לא, צריכא.

If the animal killed a man, who is commanded in all mitzvot, yes, its owner should have to pay the ransom, but if the animal killed a woman, who is obligated in only some mitzvot, no, he is exempt from the ransom. And conversely: If the Torah had taught us that men and women are equated only in this case of the ransom, one might say that because there is the loss of life God has pity on her and therefore the owner of the animal is always obligated to pay the ransom. But with regard to those two other categories, I might say no, a woman is not equated to a man. Therefore it was necessary to mention them all.

חוץ מ״בל תקיף״ ו״בל תשחית״ כו׳. בשלמא ״בל תטמא למתים״, דכתיב: ״אמר אל הכהנים בני אהרן״⁠ – בני אהרן, ולא בנות אהרן. אלא ״בל תקיף״ ו״בל תשחית״ מנלן?

§ The Mishnah teaches that women are obligated in all prohibitions except for the prohibitions of: Do not round the corners of one’s head, and: Do not destroy the corners of your beard, and: Do not contract ritual impurity from a corpse. The Talmud asks: Granted, a woman of priestly lineage is not obligated in the mitzva of: Do not contract ritual impurity from a corpse, as it is written: “Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them: None should become impure for the dead among his people” (Leviticus 21:1). This verse teaches that the prohibition applies to the sons of Aaron, but not the daughters of Aaron. But from where do we derive the prohibitions of: Do not round the corners of one’s head, and: Do not destroy the corners of your beard?