[annalex]

"No" what?

The point remains that the suggestion that "seed" will crush the head of a serpent which is near a woman's heel, -- which is well capable of crushing serpents, -- does look like a copyist error to anyone not familiar with the person of Christ, -- which Jewish copyists were.

[Springfield Reformer]

The point remains that the suggestion that "seed" will crush the head of a serpent which is near a woman's heel, ...

Except that עָקֵב (heel) is masculine, so "He will crush your head, and you (the serpent) will bruise [his] heel." Whereas the Hebrew infers the "[his]" based on the initial "He" plus the masculine "heel," the LXX supplies the "his" explicitly (αυτου).

Therefore, I can find nothing in the text about proximity to a woman's heel.  I know the D-R uses the feminine, but that's no doubt because they were borrowing the faulty initial pronoun from the Vulgate, and follow the gender error consistently with the second pronoun (Latin eius, being in the genitive, relies on external context to reveal gender). Kind of a cascade error.

Peace,

SR