Study Yevamot folio 59B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The Talmud refutes this proof: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, who maintains that a woman who engaged in atypical sex is permitted to a High Priest, and when Rav said his statement, it was in accordance with the opinion of R' Elazar
The Talmud asks: If Rav’s statement is in accordance with the opinion of R' Elazar, why did he specifically state that she is forbidden to him because she is a non-virgin? Let him derive it from the fact that she is a zona, as R' Elazar said: Even in the case of an unmarried man who had sex with an
Rav Yosef said: When Rav said that a woman who had anal sex is disqualified from marrying a High Priest, he was referring to a woman who had sex with an animal, as there she is disqualified because she is a non-virgin, but she is not disqualified because of the prohibition of a zona.
Abaye said to him: Whichever way you look at it, there is a difficulty with this answer: If she is considered a non-virgin, she is also a zona, and if she is not a zona she is also not a non-virgin. And lest you say that it is analogous to a case of a woman who lost her virginity via penetration by
Rather, R' Zeira said that Rav was referring to one who refused her husband after having only atypical sex with him. Although the act of sex was not licentious, as she was married at the time, she is nevertheless disqualified from marrying into the priesthood because she is not a virgin.