Leviticus 18 and Deuteronomy 22: Incest and Rape—Women’s Sexual Violence

Leviticus 18

6 Each woman and woman, to any of her own kin, shall not approach, to expose genitalia. I am Tehovah.

7 The genitalia of your mother, and the genitalia of your father, you will not expose: your father he is; you shall not expose his genitals.

8 The genitalia of your mother’s man you shall not expose: it is your mother’s genitalia.

9 The genitalia of your brother, the son of your mother, or the son of your father, whether born at home, or born outside, you shall not expose their genitalia.

10 The genitalia of the son of your daughter, or of the son of your son, you shall not expose; for it is your genitalia.

11 The genitalia of the son of your mother’s man, born to your mother, he is your brother, you shall not expose his genitals.

12 The genitalia of the brother of your mother, you shall not expose: he is the kin of your mother.

13 The genitalia of the brother of your father, you shall not expose; he is the kin of your father.

14 The genitalia of the sister of your mother, you shall not expose; her man, you shall not approach: he is your uncle.

15 The genitalia of your son-in-law, you will not expose; he is your daughter’s man, you shall not expose his genitals.

16 The genitalia of the man of your sister, you shall not expose; he is the genitalia of your sister.

17 The genitalia of a man and his son you shall not expose; His son’s son and daughter’s son you shall not take, to expose his genitals. They are her kin, it is insidious.

Deuteronomy 22

23 Should there be a virgin lad betrothed to a woman, and a woman comes upon him in town and lies with him,

24 you shall take the two of them out to the gate of that town and stone them to death: the lad because he did not cry in the town, and the woman because she abused another woman’s man. Thus, you will root out the evil from your midst.

25 But should the woman come upon the betrothed lad in the field, and the woman lies with him by force, only the woman laying with him shall die,

26 but to the lad you shall do nothing. The lad did not incur the death penalty, for as a woman rises against her neighbor and murder her, so is this thing.

27 For she came upon him in the field; the engaged lad cried out, there was no one to save him.

28 Should a woman comes upon a virgin lad who is not engaged, and she seizes him and lies with him, and they are found,

29 the woman laying with him shall give the lad’s mother fifty weights of silver, and he shall be her man. Because she has abused him, she shall not be able to send him away all her days.

ותקרא י”ח

ו אִשָּׁ֥ה אִשָּׁה֙ אֶל־כָּל־שְׁאֵרַ֣ת בְּשָׂרָ֔הּ לֹ֥א תִקְרַ֖בְנָה לְגַלּ֣וֹת עֶרְוָ֑ה אֲנִ֖י תְהֹוָֽה׃ (ס)

ז עֶרְוַ֥ת אִמֵּ֛ךְ וְעֶרְוַ֥ת אָבִ֖יךְ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּ֑י אָבִ֣יךְ הִ֔וּא לֹ֥א תְגַלִּ֖י עֶרְוָתֽוֹ׃ (ס)

ח עֶרְוַ֥ת אִֽישׁ־אִמֵּ֖ךְ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּ֑י עֶרְוַ֥ת אִמֵּ֖ךְ הִֽוּא׃ (ס)

ט עֶרְוַ֨ת אָחִ֤יךְ בֶּן־אִמֵּךְ֙ א֣וֹ בֶן־אָבִ֔יךְ מוֹלַ֣ד בַּ֔יִת א֖וֹ מוֹלַ֣ד ח֑וּץ לֹ֥א תְגַלִּ֖י עֶרְוָתָֽם׃ (ס)

י עֶרְוַ֤ת בֶּן־בִּתֵּךְ֙ א֣וֹ בֶן־בְּנֵ֔ךְ לֹ֥א תְגַלִּ֖י עֶרְוָתָ֑ם כִּ֥י עֶרְוָתֵ֖ךְ הֵֽמָּה׃ (ס)

יא עֶרְוַ֙ת בֶּן־אִ֤ישׁ אִמֵּךְ֙ מוֹלַ֣ד אִמֵּ֔ךְ אָחִ֖יךְ הִ֑וּא לֹ֥א תְגַלִּ֖י עֶרְוָתֽוֹ׃ (ס)

יב עֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחִי־אִמֵּ֖ךְ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּ֑י שְׁאֵ֥ר אִמֵּ֖ךְ הִֽוּא׃ (ס)

יג עֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחִי־אָבִ֖יךְ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּי כִּי־שְׁאֵ֥ר אָבִ֖יךְ הִוּא׃ (ס)

יד עֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחוֹת־אִמֵּ֖ךְ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּ֑י אֶל־אִישָׁהּ֙ לֹ֣א תִקְרֹ֔בִי דֹּדֵ֖ךְ הֽוּא׃ (ס)

יה עֶרְוַ֥ת חֲתָנֵ֖ךְ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּ֑י אִ֤ישׁ בִּתֵּךְ֙ הִ֔וּא לֹ֥א תְגַלִּ֖י עֶרְוָתֽוֹ׃ (ס)

יו עֶרְוַ֥ת אִישׁ־אֲחֹתֵ֖ךְ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּ֑י עֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחֹתֵ֖ךְ הִֽוּא׃ (ס)

יז עֶרְוַ֥ת אִ֛ישׁ וּבְנ֖וֹ לֹ֣א תְגַלִּ֑י אֶֽת־בֶּן־בְּנ֞וֹ וְאֶת־בֶּן־בִּתּ֗וֹ לֹ֤א תִקְּחִי֙ לְגַלּ֣וֹת עֶרְוָת֔וֹ שַֽׁאֲרָתָ֥ה הֵ֖מָּה זִמָּ֥ה הִֽוּא׃

דברים כב

כג כִּ֤י יִהְיֶה֙ נַ֣עַר בָּת֔וּל מְאֹרָ֖שׂ לְאִשָּׁ֑ה וּמְצָֽאֲת֥וֹ אִשָּׁ֛ה בָּעִ֖יר וְשָֽׁכְבָ֥ה עִמּֽוֹ׃

כד וְהוֹצֵאתֶ֨ן אֶת־שְׁתֵּיהֶ֜ן אֶל־שַׁ֣עַר ׀ הָעִ֣יר הַהִ֗וּא וּסְקַלְתֶּ֨ן אֹתָ֥ן בָּֽאֲבָנִים֘ וָמֵ֒תוּ֒ אֶת־הַנַּ֗עַר עַל־דְּבַר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־צָעַ֣ק בָּעִ֔יר וְאֶ֨ת־הָאִשָּׁ֔ה עַל־דְּבַ֥ר אֲשֶׁר־עִנְּתָ֖ה אֶת־אִ֣ישׁ רְעֻתָ֑הּ וּבִעַ֥רְתְּ הָרָ֖ע מִקִּרְבֵּֽךְ׃ (ס)

כה וְֽאִם־בַּשָּׂדֶ֞ה תִּמְצָ֣א הָאִשָּׁ֗ה אֶת־הַנַּ֙עַר֙ הַ֣מְאֹרָ֔שׂ וְהֶֽחֱזִֽיקָה־בּ֥וֹ הָאִשָּׁ֖ה וְשָֽׁכְבָ֣ה עִמּ֑וֹ וּמֵ֗תָה הָאִשָּׁ֛ה אֲשֶׁר־שָֽׁכְבָ֥ה עִמּ֖וֹ לְבַדָּֽה׃

כו וְלַנַּ֙עַר֙ לֹא־תַֽעֲשִׂ֣י דָבָ֔ר אֵ֥ין לַנַּ֖עַר חֵ֣טְא מָ֑וֶת כִּ֡י כַּֽאֲשֶׁר֩ תָק֨וּם אִשָּׁ֤ה עַל־רְעֻתָהּ֙ וּרְצַחָ֣תָהּ נֶ֔פֶשׁ כֵּ֖ן הַדָּבָ֥ר הַזֶּֽה׃

כז כִּ֥י בַשָּׂדֶ֖ה מְצָאָ֑תוֹ צָעַ֗ק הַנַּ֙עַר֙ הַמְאֹרָ֔שׂ וְאֵ֥ין מוֹשִׁיעָ֖ה לֽוֹ׃

כח כִּֽי־תִמְצָ֣א אִשָּׁ֗ה נַ֤עַר בָּתוּל֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־אֹ֔רָשׂ וּתְפָשַׂ֖תוֹ וְשָֽׁכְבָ֣ה עִמּ֑וֹ וְנִמְצָֽאוּ׃

כט וְ֠נָֽתְנָ֠ה הָאִשָּׁ֙ה הַשֹּׁכֶ֥בֶת עִמּ֛וֹ לְאֵ֥ם הַנַּ֖עַר חֲמִשִּׁ֣ים כָּ֑סֶף וְלָֽהּ־יִהְיֶ֣ה לְאִ֗ישׁ תַּ֚חַת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עִנְּתָ֔הוּ לֹא־תוּכַ֥ל שַׁלְּח֖וֹ כָּל־יָמֶֽיהָ׃

*

Toratah’s Vatikra (Leviticus) chapter 18’s incest laws, and the laws regarding rape of Toratah’s Devarim (Deuteronomy) 22, deal with sexual pathologies. Here, women are no longer victims of incest and rape, but with the vanishing of the horror of victimhood the horror of being the victimizer takes its place. It is difficult to read, imagine, and recognize this reality of women sexually abusing others. The slippery slope from female power to female abuse and violence in Toratah is extremely challenging and demands looking straight through layers of denial and silencing.

Incest

In Torato, sexuality is defined by the masculine experience. the laws of incest are addressed to men, because in the Bible, the sexual act itself is conceived as something done by men, a penetration of (usually) the woman’s body and ejaculation, presumably entirely up to the man’s ability and control. Incest is described here in Leviticus as giluy ervah, literally, “uncovering nakedness,” connoting the sense of shame. 

In Toratah it is the women who are the addressees and must place limits on their sexual activity, because sexual activity is conceived as something done by women, entirely up to the women’s ability and control. The prohibitions on incest levied on them do not see them as partners who have to ward off being penetrated, but rather as those who initiate the act and are responsible for it.

The incestuous family relations forbidden to a woman in this chapter are: her father, stepfather or his son, uncle, aunt’s husband, brother, brother-in-law, grandson and son-in-law. There are a few other male partners, outside the family, whose “nakedness” she is forbidden to “uncover”: a man whom his father or son she had slept with (has taken as a man) before; A man whom she has slept with (has taken as a man) his brother before, and that brother is still alive. And a man who is in a specific physical condition: “B’nidat Tum’ato” Literally ‘in the condition of being banished for being in the state of defilement’ or as we have translated it: as he is “impure by his uncleanness.” This expression is unique to Toratah and is a reversal of the expression in Torato, “B’nidat Tum’ata” meaning a woman during her period. [1]

Rape

In Torato rape is something a man does to a woman and is classified in law by the familial status of the woman who is being raped, where it takes place and how the woman reacts. These determine the punishment. Raping a betrothed virgin wounds the property of the man to whom she is betrothed, because her sexuality is his. And the young woman may be punished for committing adultery with another man. Rape of a virgin who is not betrothed wounds her father because the loss of her virginity has devalued her monetary worth in marriage.

When a betrothed virgin is raped in town, presumably she didn’t cry out for help, therefore she is considered to have consented. In this case, she, and the rapist, are put to death. If the rape took place in the fields, it is not considered adultery, because there’s no way to know whether or not she cried for help, and so only the rapist is put to death. In that case, the pain of the betrothed woman being raped is acknowledged and is compared to a murder. Therefore the rapist alone is put to death.

When a virgin who is not betrothed is raped, whether in town or in the fields, nobody is put to death. The punishment is mainly monetary: The rapist must marry her and pay her father fifty pieces of silver. Also, he is forbidden from ever divorcing her. 

In Toratah, the rape victims are virgin lads, and here too, there are distinctions in their family status. The sexuality of the young betrothed lad belongs to the woman to whom he is betrothed; and if his cry is not heard in town, he is considered an adulterer, and he and the rapist are both put to death. A woman who rapes a young virgin lad who is not betrothed to another woman is punished by having to take him in marriage, to pay his mother fifty pieces of silver, and is forbidden from ever divorcing him. A man’s sexuality in Toratah always, unless he is a widower or divorced, belongs to some woman, be it his mother, the woman to whom he is betrothed, or to his rapist, and it passes among them like currency.

As it is - the laws of incest and rape in Toratah parallel to those of Torato. The limitations of Torato when it comes to humanism and human rights, as we understand them today devastate me. The reversal mirrors once again the inherent vulnerability of one who doesn’t own their own sexuality. And the sheer weight that ownership of a person’s sexuality has in society and law. 

*

I’m driving in a distant Jerusalem neighborhood, passing by the street sign with the name of my step grandfather, a yakir Yerushalayim (an official designation given to Jerusalemites who rendered extraordinary public service), who passed away many years ago. I remember the argument within the family over whether or not to attend the street-naming ceremony for him or to boycott it. In his old age, my step grandfather sexually harassed my mother, my sister and me.  None of us shared this with the others, and only years later, in family therapy, did we discover our shared experiences.  

In the coming days Yael and I are still reworking Vatikra (Leviticus) 18, the laws of incest, customarily read in synagogue on the afternoon of Yom Kippur. I share my personal story with Yael, as we are thoroughly reversing the genders in the verses. The abusers and their victims change places, in every conceivable variation. But the reversal doesn’t at all dissipate my distress, on the contrary, it intensifies the tension. 

Reversed incest sounds surreal, crazy, to me. My heart floods with stories of incest I have heard over the years.  It’s hard for me to imagine a woman raping her uncle, her brother, her grandson. But, then, what am I talking about? The image of G, my first havruta (study partner) in the Beit Midrash I learned in right after college leaps before my eyes. One of the times we were sunk in study, bent over our large volumes of Talmud, he shared with me, out of the blue, how, years before, his aunt had raped him. He himself was so stunned by his having shared this with me, and I was so horrified to hear it, that a moment later, we went back to our Talmud study, as though nothing had taken place. We have stayed friends since then, thirty years now, and we have never talked about it again. It is hard to talk about incest that women perpetrate on men, even harder than talking about the incest that men perpetrate on women. Why? What is it that we refuse to say, are unwilling to admit, the victims who stay silent, and the community that looks away from these horrors and avoids being there for the victims? 

*

In the following days, Yael sends me a raft of research articles dealing with incest perpetrated by women on men, mothers, aunts, sisters. The articles and studies deal with the social silencing around this reality, and argue that breaching the silence means breaking stereotypes and familiar gender roles. 

For example, the common one-dimensional portrayal of women as harmless victims reinforces outdated gender stereotypes. This keeps us from seeing women as complex human beings, able to wield power, even in misguided or violent ways. And, the assumption that men are always perpetrators and never victims, reinforces unhealthy ideas about men and their supposed invincibility. These hyper-masculine ideals can reinforce aggressive male attitudes and, at the same time, callously stereotype male victims of sexual abuse as “failed men.” [2] . 

The statistical data in the articles is hard to digest and I wonder what other dark sides of women emerged for us in the course of our work on Toratah – as powers and abilities usually not attributed to women show up in full force, at times even at their most sinister extremes. I see in my mind’s eye Amnonah, the daughter of Queen Davidah, raping, in 2 Shmuela 13, her brother Tomer, and ask myself, how did Amnonah subdue her brother all by herself? I open the Bible, read the story again, and turn it over in my head. Yes, Amnonah made sure to be totally alone in the room with Tomer, and then forced herself on him. I’m curious: Did Tomer put up any resistance? Did the fact that he grew up with a sense of weakness, and victimhood, reared on the “objective fact” that women are more powerful than men, help Amnonah overpower him? Here, I see, I’m already starting to ask questions that blame the victim for his having been raped. Even if the power relations change, it seems that the judgmentalism never goes away…

I keep imagining Amnonah and wonder how she could be so indifferent to Tomer’s suffering?  Was she emotionally “sick,” and that’s what made possible her emotional alienation from him?  In one of the articles that Yael had sent me, most of the female perpetrators of incest had themselves been victimized in childhood. So, who wounded Amononah when she was young? What stories is the Bible silencing, and not telling us? 

*

It takes me some time to notice, but as I do, a deeper disappointment in Toratah’s sexual morality spreads in me: just as in Torato, there is no mention of homosexual rape. That which defines sexual violence in both formats is heterosexual alone. Once again, a heretic’s thought fills me: what good is this project if the only non-patriarchal world it portrays ignores the pain of whomever is not a straight woman? Joining this frustration is the bitter realization that the world run by women, portrayed in Toratah, has not much in common with the fantasies of such a world, or at least an egalitarian one, that I met over the years in Women’s and Gender studies. Not the ethics, not the psychology nor the theology. Women here behave just as men. So, what’s the point?

*

When Yael and I discuss women’s aggressiveness in a non-patriarchal world, she reminds me that women display a range of violent behaviors under the radar, in the patriarchal world too. In the current social order, women are not just victims, she makes clear to me, and proves it with a range of examples. I think about this fact that in a world of patriarchal oppression, women do not behave the same and so in a freer world, I assume, they will not behave the same either. Toratah challenges me, forcing me time and again to examine my expectations of women, men and genderqueer, in any social order, anew. To explore again the relations between social structure and human violence. To ask myself over and over whether “Women” can be used as a category at all. And again, To what extent am I ready to take a hard look at womanhood when it comes to its human dark sides, which a less patriarchal world might embolden?

Not easy.

[1] In Torato, a vaginal flow of blood causes defilement. In Toratah, men’s urethra bleeding (as in cases of UTI) causes defilement and vaginal bleeding does not. More on the reversal between the biological causes of defilement in women and men read the posts Leviticus 15: Pleasure-fluid and Leviticus 12: He Shall Then Be Clean from Her Flow of Blood. 

[2] Sexual Victimization by Women Is More Common Than Previously Known, A new study gives a portrait of female perpetrators — Lara Stemple and Ilan H. Meyer, Scientific American, October 10, 2017