Abstract
In both contemporary discourses and a surprising number of popular culture texts (including film and television), sibling incest between a brother and sister is a topic of titillation. What is disturbing about the vast majority of these discourses is that the “consent” of the sister is often undermined, or rendered dubious by her vulnerability. Much like the myth of the “seductive daughter,” the “up-for-it sister” is a figment of voyeuristic fantasy, a woman objectified and exploited. Also disturbing is that brother-sister relationships in the Hebrew Bible (such as Abram and Sarai, Amnon and Tamar) underscore this discourse of exploitation. In this chapter, Johanna Stiebert sets out to demonstrate that in both the Hebrew Bible and contemporary popular culture, the brother-sister relationship is eroticized, and this eroticization has overtones of rape and of legitimating rape. While one cannot assume direct influence between biblical texts and present-day cultural manifestations (notwithstanding the Bible’s considerable and abiding influence and impact), the parallels are nevertheless disquieting. Whatever the precise provenance and reason for eroticized sibling relations in both the Hebrew Bible and contemporary film and television, drawing attention to the troubling implications of these depictions (in particular with regard to compromised consent) is, argues Stiebert, the first step in detoxifying them.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
I am cognizant of the profound distinctions between “biblical worlds” and “contemporary worlds” in terms of cultural contexts and expressions. My intention here is to identify points for comparison and interfacing. While each set of worlds is immensely internally complex and nuanced, and though it is beyond the scope of this investigation to analyze this fully, the two can be juxtaposed and explored together effectively.
- 2.
Both are represented in the Hebrew Bible. Moses orders his army to slaughter everyone except (literally) “children among the women” (presumably “female children”) who have not known a man carnally (the expression used is miškab zākār, “lying of a male”); they shall be kept alive “for you” (Num. 31:18; cf. Judg. 21:11–12 ). As Michel points out, “The lack of … a limitation [of age in the direction of small children], the clear sexual connotation (‘who have not known a man’) together with the ‘for you’, and additionally the fact that this is a positive instruction or permission given by Moses characterize the verse in the context of sexual violence against children as markedly harsh” (2004, p. 57). With regard to marital rape, there is the scene where Isaac is acting sexually with Rebekah, his wife (Gen. 26:8). As Scholz points out, the verb used here (from ṣḥq) is sometimes translated “fondling” (e.g. NRSV), but may well have “less playful” and even overt “rape-prone” connotations (2010, p. 91). The same verb appears in Potiphar’s wife’s accusation that Joseph attempted to rape her (Gen. 39:14, 17). Rape can also be a strategy to get a wife (see below).
- 3.
Most of my examples are drawn from Anglophone Western contexts most familiar to me.
- 4.
See Rape Crisis England and Wales.
- 5.
Operation Yewtree is a police investigation launched in 2012 by England’s Metropolitan Police Service into sexual abuse allegations (particularly the abuse of children) made against various prominent members of the British media.
- 6.
On the sexualization of preadolescent girls in fashion , see Merskin (2004). On the vulnerability (including vulnerability to sexual exploitation) of underage girls deriving from such sexualization , see Holland and Haslam (2016). When apparent consent to sex is given by someone too young to give it legally, resulting sex acts are classified as statutory rape. Arguably, the sexualization of children below the age of consent (16) incites or mitigates statutory rape.
- 7.
For examples from US contexts with particular emphasis on the perpetuation of rape myths , see Edwards et al. (2011).
- 8.
In modern definitions, “rape” constitutes the sexual (usually penetrative) assault of a person against that person’s will. In archaic parlance, rape (from Latin raptio, “abduction”) pertains to seizing a person (most often a woman) for the purpose of sexual intercourse. Consent or otherwise is not determinative of raptio but rather a person’s removal (usually from the sphere of protection of either the natal family or spouse).
- 9.
Abducting the women of Shiloh is depicted as preferable to the demise of Benjamin or to breaking an oath. Rape, in effect, is collateral damage. Fathers and brothers of the victims of rape marriage are implored to be “generous” (NRSV). The final verse (v. 25) strikes a note of disapproval, but violence against the women, or acknowledgement of their suffering, receives no mention.
- 10.
For Zlotnick , Genesis 34 depicts tensions between two different marriage strategies: first, marriages negotiated and arranged by families, and second, marriages by abduction or elopement (2002, pp. 39–46).
- 11.
Gafney (2009) argues that Ruth and Orpah are victims of abduction marriage, as indicated by the verb from the root nś‘ (“to lift up”) for acquiring a wife (Ruth 1:4; cf. Judg. 21:21).
- 12.
Whether Shechem rapes Dinah has been widely discussed but not resolved. The majority of feminist commentators argue that he does : e.g. Rashkow (2000, pp. 44–6); Graetz (2005, p. 28); Blyth (2010); Scholz , who specifies acquaintance rape (2010, pp. 32–8). But modern understandings of rape highlight consent—and Dinah’s consent or otherwise is not mentioned. Sex between Dinah and Shechem is depicted as defiling (from tm’, Gen. 34:5 , 13 , 27 ) and an affront to her brothers’ honour. Frymer -Kensky is probably correct that it would most likely be so irrespective of whether Dinah was raped, or a willing participant in sex (1998, p. 89). The verbs describing Shechem’s actions (v. 2) are lqḥ (“he took,” possibly describing the movement of Dinah from one location to another—e.g. to Shechem’s home), škb + object (“he had sex with [her]”), and ‘nh + pronominal suffix (“he debased/humiliated/shamed [her]”). The last verb can sometimes denote rape and/or connote a lowering of Dinah’s status. Both Bechtel (1994) and van Wolde (2002) argue that the conclusion that Shechem rapes Dinah cannot be established. Zlotnick points to an accumulation of ambiguities and places the word “rape” in inverted commas (2002, pp. 35–42).
- 13.
Relatives in the first-degree are the members of one’s nuclear family: one’s parents (ascending lineal kin), one’s children (descending lineal kin), and one’s full siblings (parallel kin).
- 14.
Greenberg and Littlewood’s study estimates prevalence of GSA among reunited relatives to exceed 50 per cent (1995).
- 15.
The Westermarck effect is implied in the Hebrew Bible. First, in Abimelech’s reaction to observing Isaac acting sexually with Rebekah (Gen. 26:8–9): Abimelech does not conclude that the two are in a close-kin marriage but that they are husband and wife and ipso facto not brother and sister. A second indication is the expressed desire of the woman in Song of Songs that her lover was her brother (8:1), so that she could be affectionate with him without incurring public disapproval, presumably because sibling affection is considered non-erotic and therefore (unlike lovers’ affection) acceptable when expressed publicly.
- 16.
There are parallels also with Bergman’s atmospheric film Through a Glass Darkly (1961), which hints at brother-sister incest between Karin and Minus. Again, the sister is ill—in this case, schizophrenic.
- 17.
Prior to Genesis 17, Abraham is called “Abram” and Sarah “Sarai.” To avoid confusion, I will use the later and better-known names throughout.
- 18.
Absalom’s words to Tamar (2 Sam. 13:20 ) may not sound kind or comforting, but Trible makes the case that in Absalom’s articulation “tenderness dictates the counsel” (1984, p. 52).
- 19.
Laban submits to the will of YHWH (Gen. 24:50), asks for Rebekah’s consent, and sends her away with her nurse and a blessing (Gen. 24:57–60). While Laban’s and his mother’s request for Rebekah’s consent may be little more than a formality (Stiebert 2013, p. 38 n. 66), the depiction is of a careful, honourable, and properly conducted marriage negotiation.
- 20.
In Greek sources, indications are that paternal sibling marriage (while probably rare) is not unheard of and that homomatrioi (those sharing a mother but not a father) are more closely related and bonded than homopatrioi (those sharing a father but not a mother) (Stiebert 2016, p. 168). Marriage to a maternal (or full) sibling, therefore, is incestuous; marriage to a paternal sibling is possible.
- 21.
In the third (Genesis 26), Isaac passes off Rebekah (his cousin-wife) as his sister.
- 22.
Keshet is dismissive of any “feeble attempts of commentators to interpret [Gen. 12:13] … as if Abram did not really intend to get anything but only to save his own life,” arguing instead that the story presents him “as a sort of procurer” (2013, p. 35).
- 23.
Notably, both women are very beautiful (Gen. 12:11; 26:7), which could either confirm the narcissism or suggest that “the patriarch wants to know that his wife is attractive to foreigners ” (Kalmanofsky 2014, p. 88).
- 24.
Scholz emphasizes that this is a fantasy centred on marital rape. In her interpretation, the three stories are about “a husband [worrying] about losing sexual control over his wife” (2010, p. 93).
- 25.
Given that these stories are shot through with discrimination against foreigners, handing women over to be raped and suggestions of marital rape, this “most positive” label is especially depressing.
- 26.
Kalmanofsky proposes that Abraham, like a sister, feels vulnerable and that his statement is possibly indicative of anxiety rather than incest or incest fantasy.
- 27.
- 28.
Following the rape, Amnon calls Tamar “this [female]” (zō’ t, 2 Sam. 13:17). After the abundance of close-kin terminology, this comes across as dissonant and distancing, “as if absolving a familial relationship with her ” (Kalmanofsky 2014, p. 109).
- 29.
The suggestion that marriage to one’s rapist constitutes a “happy ending” rankles.
References
Bechtel, L.M. 1994. What if Dinah Is Not Raped? (Genesis 34). Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 62: 19–36.
begy. 2012. Incestuous Relationships. Internet/Movies Database, June 19. http://www.imdb.com/list/ls009108758/. Accessed 20 Mar 2017.
Bledstein, Adrien Janis. 2000. Tamar and the ‘Coat of Many Colors’. In A Feminist Companion to the Bible (Second Series): Samuel and Kings, ed. Athalya Brenner, 65–83. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Blyth, Caroline. 2010. The Narrative of Rape in Genesis 34: Interpreting Dinah’s Silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bucktin, Christopher. 2016. Mum and Son Incest Couple Go into Hiding as Police Say Mother Could Face 15 Years in Jail. The Mirror, April 8. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/mum-son-incest-couple-go-7717788. Accessed 12 June 2016.
Clifton, Derrick. 2014. Rape Culture Is Everywhere. Mic, October 17. https://mic.com/articles/101318/rape-culture-is-everywhere-our-kids-can-see-watch-your-favorite-music-videos-to-prove-it#pNM5Va95O. Accessed 19 May 2016.
Dostis, Melanie. 2015. Five Other Controversial Ads in Light of Bloomingdale’s ‘Inappropriate’ Date Rape Ad. New York Daily News, November 13. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bloomingdale-date-rape-ad-joins-5-controversial-ads-article-1.2434214. Accessed 19 May 2016.
Edwards, Katie M., Jessica A. Turchik, Christina M. Dardis, Nicole Reynolds, and Christine A. Gidycz. 2011. Rape Myths: History, Individual and Institutional-Level Presence, and Implications for Change. Sex Roles 65: 761–773.
Exum, J. Cheryl. 1993. Fragmented Women: Feminist (Sub)versions of Biblical Narratives. JSOT Supplement Series 163. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Fokkelman, J.P. 1981. Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel. Vol. 1. Assen: Van Gorcum.
Forbidden Love (60 Minutes). 2008. Channel 9 (Australia), TV Documentary. First Aired April 6.
Frymer-Kensky, Tikva. 1998. Virginity in the Bible. In Gender and Law in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East, ed. Victor H. Matthews, Bernard M. Levinson, and Tikva Frymer-Kensky, 79–96. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 262. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Fuchs, Esther. 2003. Sexual Politics in the Biblical Narrative: Reading the Hebrew Bible as a Woman. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 310. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Gafney, Wil. 2009. Mother Knows Best: Messianic Surrogacy and Sexploitation in Ruth. In Mother Goose, Mother Jones, Mommie Dearest: Biblical Mothers and Their Children, ed. Cheryl A. Duggan and Tina Pippin, 23–36. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature.
Graetz, Naomi. 2005. Unlocking the Garden: A Feminist Jewish Look at the Bible, Midrash and God. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press.
Greenberg, M., and R. Littlewood. 1995. Post-Adoption Incest and Phenotypic Matching: Experience, Personal Meanings and Biosocial Implications. British Journal of Medical Psychology 68 (1): 29–44.
Holland, Elise, and Nick Haslam. 2016. Cute Little Things: The Objectification of Prepubescent Girls. Psychology of Women Quarterly 40 (1): 108–119.
Kalmanofsky, Amy. 2014. Dangerous Sisters of the Hebrew Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Keshet, Shula. 2013[2003]. “Say You Are My Sister”: Danger, Seduction and the Foreign in Biblical Literature and Beyond. The Bible in the Modern World 53. Trans. A. Berris. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press.
Kunin, Seth D. 1995. The Logic of Incest: A Structuralist Analysis of Hebrew Mythology. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 185. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Merskin, Debra. 2004. Reviving Lolita? A Media Literacy Examination of Sexual Portrayals of Girls in Fashion Advertising. American Behavioral Scientist 48 (1): 119–129.
Michel, Andreas. 2004. Sexual Violence Against Children in the Bible. In The Structural Betrayal of Trust, ed. Regina Ammicht-Quinn, Hille Haker, and Maureen Junker-Kenny, 51–60. Trans. J. Bowden. Concilium 2004/3. London: SCM Press.
Rape Crisis England and Wales. n.d. Statistics. http://rapecrisis.org.uk/statistics.php. Accessed 19 May 2016.
Rashkow, Ilona N. 1992. Intertextuality, Transference, and the Reader in/of Genesis 12 and 20. In Reading Between Texts: Intertextuality and the Hebrew Bible, ed. Dana Nolan Fewell, 57–73. Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville, KY: Westminster Press.
———. 2000. Taboo or Not Taboo: Sexuality and Family in the Hebrew Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Reis, Pamela Tamarkin. 1998. Cupidity and Stupidity: Women’s Agency and the ‘Rape’ of Tamar. Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Studies 25: 43–60.
Scholz, Susanne. 2010. Sacred Witness: Rape in the Hebrew Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Schwartz, Regina M. 1997. The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Spiro, Milford E. 1956. Kibbutz: Venture in Utopia. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Stiebert, Johanna. 2013. Fathers and Daughters in the Hebrew Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. 2016. First-Degree Incest and the Hebrew Bible: Sex in the Family. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 555. New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark.
Stone, Ken. 2005. Practicing Safer Texts: Food, Sex and Bible in Queer Perspective. London and New York: T&T Clark.
Trible, Phyllis. 1984. Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Twitchell, James B. 1985. Dreadful Pleasures: An Anatomy of Modern Horror. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Waxman, Sharon. 2012. At Toronto Film Fest, Nick Cassavetes on Incest: ‘Who Gives a Damn? Love Who You Want.’ The Wrap: Covering Hollywood, September 9. http://www.thewrap.com/toronto-film-fest-nick-cassevetes-incest-who-gives-damn-love-who-you-want-55581/. Accessed 13 May 2016.
van Wolde, Ellen. 2002. The Dinah Story: Rape or Worse? Old Testament Essays 15 (1): 225–239.
Zlotnick, Helena. 2002. Dinah’s Daughters: Gender and Judaism from the Hebrew Bible to Late Antiquity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stiebert, J. (2018). Brother, Sister, Rape: The Hebrew Bible and Popular Culture. In: Blyth, C., Colgan, E., Edwards, K. (eds) Rape Culture, Gender Violence, and Religion. Religion and Radicalism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70669-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70669-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70668-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70669-6
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)