A Clash of Cultures
This is Part 1 of a 5-part Series on the Bible and the Me Too Movement.
TRIGGER WARNING:
This 5-part series on the Me Too movement contains biblical descriptions of rape, sexual assault, and violence, which may be triggering for survivors.
Before we plunge head first into such a heavy topic, there are a few things we should clarify. First, most of the events I am about to describe occurred somewhere around 1000 - 2000 years BC/BCE (roughly 3 - 4000 years ago). There is a tendency for people (especially those who are not Christians) to judge the Bible and biblical events by today's standards, but it goes without saying that it was a different time. ... A primitive time. A violent time. A time of lawlessness. (" ... all the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes." - Judges 21:25) ... Imagine the wild, wild west on steroids!
Second, there is a tendency for people (especially Christians) to falsely believe that just because something is described or included in the Bible, that God was somehow okay with it or condoned it. However, that couldn't be further from the Truth; there are many events or behaviors described in the Bible which God was furious about, particularly in the earliest books of the Bible. If you read scripture surrounding Noah and the flood, God sent the flood because He was so angry and grieved at how violent people were at that particular time in history.
Having established that, the first rape to be recorded in scripture is found in Genesis 34:1-31. We are not told anything at all about Dinah, the young woman who was raped, or her perspective, which makes the title to this chapter, "Revenge Against Shechem", very fitting. Nor are we told anything at all about how God viewed these events, but we can surmise from other portions of scripture that He was angered and grieved by them.
What we do get to see, however, is a very telling description of how the men around Dinah reacted and/or responded to these events, and we can stand to learn a lot about God's heart toward women from this contrast between two very different cultures and three very different attitudes about women.
It is roughly 2000 years BC/BCE, and Jacob is traveling with his family from Paddan-aram back to his hometown to resettle there. On the way, they stop in a town in Canaan, buy some property from a very prominent family in the region headed by a man named Hamor, and set up camp.
Jacob and Leah's young daughter, Dinah, goes into town one day to see some of the young women who lived in the area. Hamor's son, Shechem, sees Dinah, abducts her and rapes her. We are not told much about the rape itself, but we can surmise from the original Hebrew that it was "by force".
Afterwards, Shechem decides he wants to marry her, so he tries to "win her affection with tender words" (Genesis 34:3). (I could be wrong here, but I'm guessing that might not have gone over too well!) So Hamor and Shechem go to see Jacob and his sons to try to arrange a marriage between the two. Let's not forget that the implication is that Dinah is still being held against her will at Shechem's house throughout all of this!
What occurs next is a clash of cultures. As with most cultures at that time, the men in Hamor and Shechem's community saw women as property; objects to be possessed. Shechem saw something he wanted and took it, even though it didn't "belong" to him, and they approach this marriage proposal as a business deal:
Hamor suggests, " ... Please let him marry her. In fact, let's arrange other marriages, too. You give us your daughters for our sons, and we will give you our daughters for your sons. And you may live among us; the land is open to you! Settle here and trade with us. And feel free to buy property in the area." (Genesis 34:8-10)
Shechem begs, " ... I will give you whatever you ask. No matter what dowry or gift you demand, I will gladly pay it - just give me the girl as my wife." (Genesis 34:11-12) It's interesting to note that, typically, a dowry would have been paid by the bride's family to the groom, not the other way around, so it is as if Shechem is offering to "buy" her from Jacob and her family at any price.
Jacob and his sons, however, see things much differently. Dinah's brothers were "shocked and furious that their sister had been raped." "Shechem had done a disgraceful thing ... something that should never be done." (Genesis 34:7) They also express anger about Shechem's offer to pay a dowry, as they feel he has treated their sister like a prostitute, exchanging money for sex. And they see it not just as a horrible offense against Dinah, but as an offense against their whole family as well. As you will soon see, their attitudes and behavior may, at times, seem barbaric by today's standards, but at that particular time in history, I would dare say it might have been considered fairly "progressive".
Unfortunately, Jacob and his sons are at a physical disadvantage; they are outnumbered by the men in Shechem's community, and Shechem is still holding Dinah captive at this point, so they lie to Hamor and Shechem in an attempt to outwit them. For Jacob's family, the custom is for the men to be circumcised as a symbolic expression of their devotion to God, so, assuming that there is no way Hamor and Shechem will agree to do this, they tell Hamor and Shechem that if all of the men in the community will be circumcised, then they will agree to Hamor and Shechem's proposal. However, if any of the men refuse, then Dinah must be returned to them and they will be on their way. This is kind of like the modern day equivalent of a hostage negotiation, and I think it's safe to say that they felt pretty confident that it would be a "no-brainer"!
However, much to their shock and dismay, Shechem is very determined and, apparently, very influential! All of the men in the town council agree to the arrangement and get circumcised. Again, the men in the community see it as a business deal. "If we do this, all their livestock and possessions will eventually be ours. Come, let's agree to their terms and let them settle here among us." (Genesis 34:23)
Well, Simeon and Levi, two of Dinah's brothers, were having none of this! Remember, none of them ever had any intention of following through on this arrangement in the first place; it was simply an attempt to try to get Hamor and Shechem to back down and let Dinah go. So, while the men in town were still vulnerable ("their wounds were still sore" from circumcision; Genesis 34:25), Simeon and Levi took their swords, caught the men by surprise, killed them all, and freed Dinah.
Then the rest of Jacob's sons "plundered the town". "They seized all the flocks and herds and donkeys - everything they could lay their hands on, both inside the town and outside in the fields. They looted all their wealth and plundered their houses." (Genesis 34: 27-29) Thus, the title of the chapter, "Revenge Against Shechem".
Unfortunately, we can now see the second type of attitude toward women a bit more clearly: "They also took all their little children and wives and led them away as captives." (Genesis 34:29)
While Jacob's sons didn't necessarily see all women as objects or possessions, they did have a double standard when it came to women; one I think we still commonly see today. In an argument with their father, they justify their own violent behavior by saying, "But why should we let him (Shechem) treat our sister like a prostitute?" (Genesis 34:31) In other words, we have one standard for the women we love - our mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters - and we will be fiercely protective of them, but we have a different standard when it comes to women we don't love or don't have a relationship with (prostitutes, foreign women, etc.). They saw women (and a woman's value) only in terms of their relationship with the men. In this regard, Jacob's sons appear to have a problem with self-righteousness and hypocrisy; they see themselves as spiritually superior to men like Hamor and Shechem, while failing to see similar attitudes and behaviors in themselves, just played out within a different context.
By this point, we have seen two very different cultures and two very different attitudes toward women. However, there is still a third attitude - a definite outlier for the time period. Jacob has had some personal encounters with God in the chapters leading up to this, and it seems as if Jacob has a different attitude about women than most would expect at that time. For example, he works for his father-in-law for 7 years to earn the right to marry Rachel. He marries Leah, affording her respect as his wife, in order to honor and protect her when many men might not have done that. When he wants to leave his father-in-law's house to return to his homeland and take Leah and Rachel and their children with him, he asks Leah and Rachel if they are willing to go, defying cultural standards at that time by treating his wives as partners; human beings deserving of respect and exercising free will. After 13 years of marriage, both Leah and Rachel feel that Jacob has treated them with greater respect than their own father and willingly leave their homeland to settle in a foreign land with him. And I get the sense that, while he is presumably angry and grieved by Dinah's rape, he also feels conflicted about the violence and revenge others, including innocent women and children, have experienced at the hands of his sons as well.
But despite these noble acts, Jacob is typically too afraid of what other men will think of him or will do to him if he stands up for his principles. ... He leaves his father-in-law's house in secret. He fails to confront Shechem. He worries about the danger his family might be in when other men in the surrounding communities find out about what his sons have done.
I think, in our culture, we still have some "Hamor"'s and "Shechem"'s out there for sure, even within the walls of our churches; men who are physically or verbally abusive to women, are looking for a "trophy wife", or who exploit the concept of biblical submission. But I think there are far more "Simeon"'s and "Levi"'s; men who are fiercely protective of the women they love, but struggle at times to treat women outside of that context with the same level of dignity and respect. And, truth be told, they probably see themselves as spiritually superior to other men who are more obviously misogynistic, but fail to see some of their own hypocrisy.
And then I think there are a huge number of men - a silent majority, in fact - who are "Jacob"'s. They know women have a right to be treated with dignity, honor, respect, and equality, and they try to treat women accordingly in their own lives. But they may have a hard time speaking up when confronted by the culture around them, whether Christian culture or secular culture.
If you're a "Jacob", the women (and men) saying #MeToo need you. We need you to say, #ISeeYouToo.
© I Lift My Voice, 2022.
Comments