Parashat Shemot describes the dramatic birth of the people of Israel - the transformation from an extended family into a nation. It opens with a moment of historical rupture: “A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph.” What follows is systematic dehumanization - forced labor, enslavement, and finally a genocidal decree: Every Hebrew male child is to be killed, while only the girls are allowed to live so that no future can be imagined for Israel as a people.
This period of enslavement represents one of the darkest chapters in Jewish collective memory. It is a moment of fear, despair, and existential threat.
Yet precisely in this space of darkness, women emerge as the unexpected agents of resistance and renewal. They do not wait for redemption; they actively create the conditions for it.
In my long-standing research on the worlds of religious Zionist women, I sought a theoretical framework that could meaningfully define religious feminism without importing models that do not fit religious communities. I identified three distinct types of feminist response within patriarchal religious systems.
The first is patriarchal feminism, a form of behavior marked by outward obedience and internal compliance with male authority. Women accept the system as it is, even when it silences them. The second is bargaining feminism, a concept inspired by Deniz Kandiyoti’s work. Here, women negotiate with patriarchy from within - arguing, persuading, and reshaping reality without formally breaking boundaries.
Challenging but not radical feminism
The third type, which I identified and conceptualized as a new theoretical contribution, is challenging feminism. This is not radical feminism, which breaks away from the system and is therefore often excluded from religious communities. Challenging feminism remains inside the boundaries, but stretches them to their very limits. Challenging women speak truth to power, confront authority directly, and act against unjust commands - without leaving the religious framework.
This typology offers a powerful lens through which to reread Parashat Shemot.
The first female response we encounter is that of the Hebrew midwives, Shifra and Puah, who are commanded by Pharaoh to kill the newborn boys on the birthing stones. Outwardly, they appear compliant; inwardly, they resist. Their response initially resembles patriarchal feminism - obedience on the surface, defiance beneath it.
A second response emerges in the figure of Miriam. When her father Amram, overwhelmed by despair, announces that Jewish men should no longer bring children into the world, Miriam confronts him. The Midrash records a bold dialogue: “Pharaoh decreed only against the males,” she tells her father, “but you have decreed against both males and females.” Through moral clarity and courageous argument, Miriam persuades Amram to reverse his decision. This is bargaining feminism at its finest - a single act of negotiation that changes history and allows future generations, including Moses, to be born.
The most radical moment, however, belongs again to the midwives - but now in a different register. When Pharaoh confronts them and asks why Hebrew children continue to be born, they answer him audaciously: “Because the Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women; they are vigorous - ki chayot henah - they give birth before the midwife arrives.” This is no longer quiet resistance. This is daring, public defiance. They argue with the tyrant himself, stretch the discourse to its limits, and continue acting directly against his command. This is challenging feminism in its purest form.
Women rewarded with dynasties
The Torah underscores the theological significance of their actions: “God dealt well with the midwives… and He made them houses.” Rashi explains that these “houses” were dynasties of priesthood and Levites - roles inherited exclusively through men.
In an extraordinary reversal, women who challenged patriarchal power are rewarded by becoming the founders of the most sacred male institutions in Jewish life. The message is unmistakable: Moral courage, not submission, is what sustains holiness.
What, then, can we learn from this parashah in the shadow of October 7 and the ongoing post-war crisis we are living through?
First, despair is never a Jewish option. Moments of existential rupture demand agency, not paralysis.
Second, history teaches us that women are often the first to respond - not with slogans, but with action, creativity, and moral clarity. In Egypt, women refused to surrender life: They continued to bring children into the world, encouraged their exhausted husbands, and used the mirrors of hope to insist on continuity.
Post Oct. 7 liminal space
After October 7, we find ourselves again in a liminal space - between trauma and rebuilding, between mourning and responsibility. This parashah reminds us that redemption does not begin with grand strategies, but with courageous acts taken in dark moments. Feminist language - agency, resistance, negotiation, boundary-stretching - helps us name these processes and understand their power.
The future of the Jewish people has never depended solely on warriors or leaders. Again and again, it has depended on women who refused to accept despair as destiny. Then, as now, the path forward is not withdrawal - but brave, ethical, and persistent engagement.
This, perhaps, is the deepest lesson of Shemot for our time.
The writer is a professor at the Sal Van Gelder Center for Holocaust Instruction and Research, Faculty of Education, Bar Ilan University.