If we lived in a truly equal society a woman running around naked would be treated the same as a man running around naked. (i.e. arrested for sexual harassment)

I’m very sympathetic to discussions of rape culture, but really take a simple experiment and ask what would happen if a man did the equivalent actions. Rape is over course never appropriate. And to the degree these sorts of thought experiments draw attention to how some men justify horrendous acts with any excuse then they are successful. But at the same time I think people need to realize that if men did the same things that are in the thought experiments they’d be fired or arrested.

From Jon: The beach was fine — beautiful day, not too hot, water a bit chilly but…sorry, off topic. I’m sure no one cares about a beach report.

But, seriously, I found it…refreshing?…that one of the aforementioned ladies near us (who couldn’t be accused of inappropriate dress since there was hardly any “dress” available) seemed perfectly comfortable with her body image, even with a large belly (sporting a large tattoo for emphasis) and what could be considered a rather revealing half-a-kini.

For me personally, this wasn’t a “banish lustful thoughts” moment (and certainly not a “how dare you, woman!” moment) — just an “ain’t anatomy interesting” moment, and a thought that people being more comfortable with their shape and size, whatever it be, would be a good thing. I’m not advocating her particular method of demonstrating her comfort, but whatever I think of it is my business or my problem, as it were, not hers.

I do think modesty of thought and modesty of action are good things. I don’t think coming down on a person for having bare shoulders is necessarily a good thing. (Lori tells me that, growing up a good Mormon teen, she regularly wore tank tops, and it just wasn’t a thing. What happened to shoulders in the intervening years?)

Anyway, even without going to the beach, I am regularly passed on the street by bare shoulders, lots of leg, yoga pants, et al. In the (dress-code-free) university where I teach, the outfits span the spectrum. But I really think it’s up to me to control what I think about it (including that it’s no big deal), and it’s up to them to decide what they want to wear. That’s all.

This is an assertion I hear a lot but nobody ever backs it up with actual data. How do you measure this, is it just a heuristic shot-in-the-dark or is there some secret trove of data on morality that actually backs up this statement? Whenever I hear people say this, they usually mention some cherry-picked situation or observation that is highly subjective in nature. We all just nod along, as if this assumption were true and everyone knows it somehow. Well, it’s high time that people who say this put up or shut up. So, show us the data. I’m quite happy to supply actual data to the contrary.

The main idea though is of human weakness vs. divine strength and the idea that one can’t really oppose God, regardless of the details of the imagery used. I’m skeptical of Bloom’s reading, even though I’m completely unqualified to say that sort of thing. However as you suggest Bloom often seems intentionally taking the more controversial reading possible to rile people up. I think the meaning here is less sexual than more akin to say Isaiah 8:11 “for the LORD spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying….” The idea is that regardless of what the prophet wants, God’s going to make sure he delivers the message. (The story of Jonah obviously applies here)

Herbert Marks, in his edition of the KJV, says that the Hebrew word here rendered “deceived” has the connotation of “enticed, seduced” (Exodus 22:16; Hosea 2:14 [KJV “allure”]), and that “art stronger than I” elsewhere has the meaning “force (sexually)” (rape law in Deut 22:25; Amnon raping Tamar in 2 Sam 13:11–14).

The Jewish scholar Harold Bloom, in his irreverent but moving book Ruin the Sacred Truths, translates Jeremiah 20:7 like this: “Yahweh, you seduced me unlawfully, and I consented to being seduced; you raped me, and you were too strong for my resistance to prevail. All day long I have become an object of derision; everyone mocks me.”

I did an English BA at BYU and a poem by John Donne comes to mind, “Batter my heart, three-person’d God,” where he basically asks God to rape the evil out of him.

Frankly, rape is wrong whatever the Bible or any other scriptures have to say about it. But does anyone have any thoughts why scripture, and Donne’s scripture-inspired poem, would equate spirituality with one of the worst crimes we know about? And why the Second Coming, taking its other name from the Latin Bible, would be called rapture? And why at the height of Jesus’ sacrifice the veil of the temple was rent?

Personally, I have no idea.

Let’s assume that I am a typical young woman who finds young men in suits attractive, and occasionally my mind might wander past the suit. Aren’t those young men obligated to protect me from losing my ‘virtue’ by not wearing well tailored suits? Aren’t they just flaunting their masculinity? Where does their responsibility lie?

When Suits Become a Stumbling Block: A Plea to My Brothers in Christ*

It just wasn’t. Really, it just wasn’t.

Most of history was 1000x worse than what we have today. And I’ll agree with you that objectification of women is a real problem. But I certainly don’t want to return to the sexual status of my foremothers -more modern or especially ancient.