close

Masculinities

New Book! Behold the Men

We are thrilled to tell you more about a new book, Behold the Men (SCM, 2025), co-edited by Robert Beckford and Rachel Starr,

Tell us a bit about you.

We are both contextual theologians, shaped by distinct traditions and experiences. Robert is a black liberation theologian and Rachel a (critical) white feminist theologian. Beginning work on the book, we had different questions we wanted to explore in relation to theologies of masculinities. More than a dialogue, Behold the Men brings together a wide range of voices, styles, perspectives from over a dozen contributors (including the Shiloh Project’s Chris Greenough), all offering something from their own lived experience and reflections.

What motivated you to carry out the research for this book?

Our students! When teaching on gender and theology, male students repeatedly asked what theological resources there were for exploring masculinities. There seemed to be a need for an introductory resource which would help direct students to existing material as well as identify further work to be done.

We were aware of so much insightful work within biblical studies around masculinities. In biblical studies, the conversations seem more developed than in theology. Of course, there has been work on masculinities within practical theology, particularly in pastoral theology by Mark Pryce and Delroy Hall. In spirituality also, Joseph Gelfer and others have asked critical questions about men’s spirituality movements and how they often serve to reinforce dominant, violent models of masculinity. We’ve tried to map some of these existing conversations as well as identify gaps.

The book has been out a month now, and we’ve had lots of conversations about how timely it is in relation to global political developments. But to be honest, it’s long overdue. The questions and connections we invite people to explore in the book are vital ones. We recognise the negative impact of dominant violent models of masculinity on people, politics and planet. And we recognise how significant religion is in shaping people’s identity, beliefs and behaviours. In the church and beyond, we’re aware of how gender, alongside race and other identity markers, is used to limit who people are and how they relate to others. To fix relationships of power and inequality.

Unlike many books on men and Christianity, the primary focus is not on how to get more men to attend church. Rather, it’s concerned with the type of masculinity that churches often promote, especially those churches which are keen to attract more men. So, another aim of the book is to encourage churches to explore what models of masculinity they are encouraging and whether those models are healthy, inclusive ones.

What impact do you hope it will have?

We have big hopes for this book! Already it seems to be generating conversations and helping identify further work needed. In March 2025, Queen’s is hosting an event to both launch the book and provide a space for conversation amongst people from a range of contexts who are exploring models of masculinity within Christian traditions and beyond.

Behold the Men is, of course, a play on Pilate’s words (John 19.5), mocking words that form part of the violence of the crucifixion story. They invite others to look at Jesus and see his vulnerability and failure. In some translations, a similar phrase appears in Judges 19.22, ‘behold, the men of the city’, once again serving as a preface to violence, this time carried out by the men being observed.

By naming the book, Behold the Men, we are asking readers to look at, to pay attention to men and models of masculinity. There is something to see here, something to assess and analyse. Violence, pain and loss, yes – but perhaps also possibilities for new ways of being, possibilities which emerge from paying careful attention to ourselves and others. We hope the title further invites reflection on holding, embracing, connection. What does it mean to be held or embraced as a man? How are men helped to pay attention to their own and others’ power and vulnerability in such embraces? The book, we hope, is an invitation to embrace both who we are and the potential for connection and change.

What else are you working on?

Robert: I am currently developing a multi-media project in response to the Christian based reparations projects in Britain.

Rachel: I’m delighted to be involved in the Bible and Violence project with colleagues from the Shiloh Project, especially in helping bring in Latin American biblical scholars and perspectives. With Elizabeth Gareca and Larry José Madrigal, I co-edited a recent issue of Revista de Interpretación Bíblica Latinoamericana focused on resistant and resilient readings of the Bible in contexts of violence. Coming up also is the re-publication of a journal article exploring reading Mark 7 as a white woman, first published in Practical Theology. And finally, I’m delighted to have contributed to God’s Stories As Told By God’s Children, produced by The Bible for Normal People and out March 2025.

Where can we find out more about you?

You can visit our Queen’s staff pages: Robert and Rachel. Robert can often be found on BBC Radio 4 and occasionally writes for The Guardian. Rachel kept a blog while living and studying in Argentina and, in recent years, has revived it in a low-key way.

Give us one quote to whet our appetites!

‘What might an embodied, earthed theological model of masculinity look like? …

Such a model of masculinity would begin by recognizing that men are bodies and souls – bodysouls – and must find ways of accepting and valuing their whole self (Louw 2012). It would encourage men to engage with the complexity of their bodies, lives and stories: to listen to their bodies that speak of trauma and grief, violence and pain, joy and hope. It would make space for fluid notions of sex and gender identity, roles and relationships. Queer theologies have much to offer here (Gelfer 2009). An embodied earthed model would support men in discovering and expressing their emotions, to understand that to be human is to be finite and vulnerable (World Council of Churches 2005, Louw 2012). It would bear witness to the relational nature of humanity, that all humans, men included, can only exist in relationship (World Council of Churches 2005, Anderson 2020). As Phyllis Trible (1978) observed on reading Genesis 2, the first human is not gendered, only becoming so through the creation of a second person, a partner. Gender is relational, and thus to be a man can only be understood in relation to other men, women and non-binary people; in relation to the wider world; and, for people of faith, in relation to God. Finally, such a model would challenge men to work for justice, equality and inclusion (Baker-Fletcher 1996; Anderson 2020).’ (Beckford and Starr 2025, pp. 10–20)

read more

Genesis 14: Could Lot Potentially Be a Victim of Attempted Sexual Enslavement or Attempted Wartime Rape?

Today’s post is by Victoria Mildenhall. The featured image is The Capture of Lot, by James Dabney McCabe, 1842-1883.

Victoria studied for her undergraduate degree with the Open University and went on to complete two Masters degrees in Ancient Religion with Theology and Criminology.  She is due to begin a PhD at Leeds University under the supervision of Johanna Stiebert (Biblical Studies) and Sam Lewis (Criminology and Criminal Justice), focussing on models of justice in the Bible that respond to instances of sexual violation.

The narrative of Genesis 14:1-24, recounting Lot’s kidnapping and rescue, is intriguing to biblical scholars for multiple reasons. Firstly, Abra(ha)m[1] is depicted here as a community leader and warrior, which is not the case in some other parts of scripture, which show him as a rather more solitary figure, or in domestic, family dynamics.  Secondly, it contains one of very few biblical references to Melchizedek and this is the only instance where this mysterious priest-king appears in person.[2]  Thirdly, the passage contains cultural, theological, political and topographical hints that might yield clues for the interpretation of surrounding passages. 

When it comes to analysing sexual violence in the Hebrew Bible, however, this pericope is most often overlooked, probably due to its abundant ambiguities, including where the intention of Lot’s kidnappers is concerned.  Yet, by examining the narrative of Genesis 14 inter-textually in the light of scriptures and themes in its close proximity, I will argue that Lot narrowly avoids becoming a victim of sexual enslavement, or wartime rape.  Four points provide the rationale for my assertion: surrounding and associated scriptures that depict or suggest sexual violation; scriptural condemnation levelled at sexual practices of neighbouring peoples, particularly the Canaanites; the presentation of Lot; and the use of the Hebrew term lqh

The first part of Genesis 14 describes a political conflict raging throughout the region.  A coalition of four kings, led by King Chedorlaomer of Elam, wages war with five cities south of the Dead Sea after they rebel (14:1-9). Things are going badly for the rebels when some fall into the bitumen pits and the rest flee to the hill country (v.10).  This creates an opportunity for Chedorlaomer and his cohort; they plunder Sodom and Gomorrah, taking goods, possessions, and the inhabitants, presumably as enslaved people, including Lot and his household (14:11-12, 16). One individual escapes and reports the events to Abra(ha)m, who gathers a military unit of three hundred and eighteen men and goes in pursuit (14:13-14).  In a night-time battle, Abra(ha)m and his men successfully rescue Lot and his possessions (14:15-16). Rather than keeping the plunder and enslaving any captives, Abra(ha)m returns them to the King of Sodom and is blessed by Melchizedek, to whom Abra(ha)m pays a tithe (14:17-20).

Is Abra(ha)m making a strategic point here? Is he communicating that he does not want to be implicated in any way in the horrors from which he has rescued his nephew, Lot? And if so, what might these horrors be? I argue that Lot was rescued from sexual violence, such as rape, or sexual enslavement.

The first reason that this passage might be included among texts of the Hebrew Bible suggestive of sexual aggression and violence is its proximity to other such passages, including two of male-on-male violence or, at the very least, male-on-male sexualised impropriety and domination: the first is the odd story fragment of Ham and his naked father Noah (Genesis 9:20-25), and the second, the account of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah following a threat of male-male rape (Genesis 19:5). Other examples of sexual violence are Lot’s daughters’ violation of their father (Genesis 19:30-38) and the narrative of Abra(ha)m telling Pharaoh that Sarai (=Sarah)[3] is his sister so that Pharaoh “takes” her (Genesis 12:10-20). It is against this wider background of rape-threats and violations that we find the pericope of Lot’s kidnap.

Secondly, biblical references to Canaanite people are repeatedly accompanied by aspersions as to their sexual immorality and depravity (e.g. Leviticus 18:3; Deuteronomy 20:18; 1 Kings 14:24). Targeting Abra(ha)m’s nephew for sexual enslavement or rape would fit into this picture. There is a pronounced connection in the Hebrew Bible between foreign gods, including those of Canaan, and sexual immorality. Idolatry and worship of other gods are metaphorically associated with adultery in several of the prophetic texts (Hosea 1-2; Ezekiel 16 and 23), and Israel is explicitly warned against both foreign gods and sexual impropriety to preserve collective identity and holiness (Leviticus 18). The story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19), where Lot reappears in a later narrative, also associates Canaanite cities with very negative qualities, be this the threat of male-male rape or inhospitality (Greenough, 2021, p.21).

Thirdly, in all of his appearances in the Hebrew Bible, Lot is shown to be vulnerable.  In Genesis 13:11 he separates from Abra(ha)m, which might reflect a theological and ideological separation between (favoured) uncle and (wanting) nephew, with the narrator emphasising distance between them. In the narrative in Genesis 14, Lot has failed in protecting his household; he is in a position of responsibility, and he has not lived up to this role – hence, Abra(ha)m has to rescue him. In the later narrative of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot is under pressure, going so far as to offer up his own daughters to a mob of threatening men (Genesis 19:8). He cannot save himself or his family; Lot’s own sons-in-law don’t take him seriously (Genesis 19:14); divine messengers intervene to save Lot together with his wife and daughters; even then, Lot dithers (Genesis 19:16). He is portrayed as thoroughly ineffectual.[4]

It might be that the men of Sodom assault Lot in a sexualised manner when he is negotiating with them.  The wording describing their interaction is unusual: “Then they pressed hard against the man Lot…” (Genesis 19:9, NRSV).  Whatever is going on here, it could be sexually threatening, or, at least, threatening to Lot’s masculinity. Notably (and, arguably, superfluously) Lot is called “the man Lot”. Moreover, to protect his visitors and – presumably – himself also, Lot resorts to offering the mob in Sodom a sexual substitute: his own daughters, whom he identifies as virgins (Genesis 19:8). The offer of his own daughters, whom he ought to protect, is frightful. It also indicates both the acute danger of the situation and the sexually charged nature of the threat.

Finally, it is significant that Lot is the victim of his own daughters’ sexual violation when he is drunk and they, in turn, exploit his lack of awareness to conceive sons with him (Genesis 19:30-38). Again, Lot is rendered vulnerable here; he is exploited for sex.

Chris Greenough observes, “Hegemonic masculinity promotes attitudes, behaviours and regulation within society and culture that all serve to perpetuate notions of men as strong, powerful, warrior-like and consequently, the opposite of a victim” (2021, p.13). Lot repeatedly falls short, including in terms of implied notions of hegemonic masculinity. It is Abra(ha)m who acts as warrior and rescuer – that is, as masculine. Lot, however, needs to be rescued – first by Abra(ha)m (Genesis 14), and then by the divine messengers (Genesis 19). Lot is unable to protect his visitors or his family. He is repeatedly threatened in sexual and sexualised ways (Genesis 19:9, 33, 35) – including, I am proposing in Genesis 14. 

In terms of the implied gender ideology of Genesis a man who is overpowered, including sexually overpowered, is a man whose masculinity is diminished. Lot is repeatedly shown to be overpowered – and dramatically so here where Abra(ha)m rescues him.  Once more, Lot fails as a man; later, he cannot defend himself against his violent neighbours (whom he calls “brothers”, Genesis 19:7), or against his own daughters (Genesis 19:31-36): he certainly can’t stand up to the armies of several kings. He is completely in their power and control. 

The final indicator that sexual violation is implied in Genesis 14 is the occurrence of the Hebrew verbal root lqh (lamed-qoph-chet, Genesis 14:12).  This widely used verb is most often translated with variants of “to take”.[5] Relevant to my enquiry, lqh is also used to indicate taking for sex and rape: Sarai (=Sarah) is taken by Pharaoh (Genesis 12:19), and the verb also pertains to the kidnap and rape of Dinah by Shechem (Genesis 34:2).  Sandie Gravett (2004) proposes that lqh can be used in instances where force and violence apply, including and prominently where sexual violation is implied. 

In Genesis 14, those who are “taken” (including Lot) appear to be taken for purposes of enslavement.  Just like the other goods that are seized (Genesis 14:11-12) they become the victors’ property. As enslaved persons, whether they be male or female, they would have no agency and, consequently, no say over their bodies, including any right of refusal of rape. Moreover, in war and so-called conquest, sexual violence of those who are overpowered is no rarity – as is evidenced widely in the Hebrew Bible (e.g. Numbers 31:9-18; Deuteronomy 21:10-14; Judges 5:30, and many other examples), as well as in distressing events right up to the present. Gender is irrelevant, as rape is not about attraction or desire, but about dominance and humiliation. There are plenty of biblical indications of males humiliated in war and conquest, including in sexualised ways (e.g. Judges 16:25; 1 Samuel 31:4; Lamentations 5:13).

In summary, four key aspects underline my argument for including Genesis 14:1-24 in discourses of sexual violence and violation in the Hebrew Bible. In this case, the attempted sexual violation is perpetrated by men (the forces led by Chedorlaomer) against a man (Lot). First, surrounding narratives establish a thematic foundation for sexual violation; and secondly, Canaan and its people are prominently characterised as deviant. Third, Lot is juxtaposed with Abra(ha)m, and consistently falls short of him; Lot emerges as vulnerable and ineffectual – in other words, as inadequately masculine and as vulnerable, including as vulnerable to sexual aggression. This vulnerability is demonstrated also by the way he is threatened at Sodom and violated by his own daughters (Genesis 19). Finally, the use of lqh can be suggestive of kidnapping as well as sexual violation. Collectively, this points to, or at least strongly hints at, Lot in Genesis 14 being at risk of enslavement and, therewith, – not for the last time – at risk of sexual violence.

References

Gravett, S. (2004) Reading ‘Rape’ in the Hebrew Bible: A Consideration of Language, JSOT 28, no. 3 (2004): 279-99.

Greenough, C. (2021) The Bible and Sexual Violence Against Men. Abingdon, OX: Routledge.


[1] Abraham, as he is better known, is named “Abram” up until YHWH changes his name in the course of a covenant agreement (see Genesis 17:5).

[2] Melchizedek is a name made up of two Hebrew words meaning “king” and “righteous.” The name occurs also in Psalm 110:4 and in the New Testament, in Hebrews 7. Additionally, allusions to Melchizedek appear in the so-called Melchizedek Scroll found among the Dead Sea Scrolls (11QMelch or 11Q13).

[3] As part of the covenant (see note 1), God renames Sarai “Sarah” and blesses her (Genesis 17:15-16).

[4] Possibly, Lot had defected to the customs or gods of Sodom. Abra(ha)m steps in and attempts to negotiate with YHWH. Although Abra(ha)m falls short of asking specifically for YHWH to spare his nephew, he effectively asks YHWH to evaluate for himself whether Lot counts as a righteous man (18:23-33).

[5] See NRSV ad loc: “they also took Lot…”.

read more

Spotlight! Chris Greenough

Routledge Focus series: Rape Culture, Religion and the Bible

Chris Greenough is author of The Bible and Sexual Violence Against Men, which was first published in 2020. He is co-director of The Shiloh Project and is currently co-editing a great deal (see below!)

How do you reflect back on writing your book? 

I wrote a lot of the book during the first lockdown of the Covid pandemic in 2020. While this was a period of general worry and anxiety for the global population, writing helped me retain a daily focus and routine. The most fruitful part of working on the book, for me, was working with Caroline Blyth, Katie Edwards and Johanna Stiebert, series co-editors at that time. All of us checked in with one another regularly, sharing life updates and things to keep our spirits up! Caroline’s feedback on the drafts was immensely helpful and certainly shaped the final product.

What has been the response to your book?

Since the publication of the book, I’ve been invited to speak about its contents, including as a keynote speaker in the Finnish Institute in Rome in 2022. I’ve spoken at the Ehrhardt seminar series at the University of Manchester, too. There’s a real interest in how the biblical text speaks back to contemporary issues around masculinity, and especially male victims of sexual violence. 

How and where are you now and what are you doing or working on at present?

I’m currently working on Bible and Violence, a comprehensive volume I’m editing with Johanna Stiebert (University of Leeds), Johnathan Jodamus (University of the Western Cape) and Mmapula Kebaneilwe (University of Botswana). It’s an ambitious project, with around 120 chapters. My own chapter in the volume focuses on how religious language, imagery and biblical texts are used in the manosphere, particularly in incel forums. I’m also editing a volume with Caroline Blyth – T&T Clark Handbook of Sexualities in the Bible and its Reception. Both are due out later this year/early 2025. 

Do you have any advice for authors of future publications in this series?

Keep seeking feedback on your proposals and drafts – the editors are superb and generous!

What topics in the area of rape culture, religion and/or the Bible would you like to see a book on?

I think a focus on violence towards LGBTQ+ people would make an important contribution, given the often tense and hostile positions from religious organisations. I touch on this in some way in my book, but a volume dedicated to this topic would be significant. 

Do you have a shout-out to anyone working in this general area? Please shout about them!

The late, great David J. Clines’ work continues to be influential in the field. Deryn Guest’s work in Beyond Feminist Biblical Studies (2012, Sheffield Phoenix) continues to give me life, especially the chapter on the critical studies of masculinities. Barbara Thiede produces some of the most powerful and punchy work I’ve read on biblical masculinities. And David Tombs’ great work on the crucifixion of Jesus as sexual abuse offers much thought and reflection for those in faith-based communities and organisations. 

read more

Spotlight! Joachim Kügler

Routledge Focus Series: Rape Culture, Religion and the Bible

Joachim is Professor of New Testament at the University of Bamberg in Germany, as well as an ordained priest of the Catholic Church. His book in the series is Zeus Syndrome: A Very Short History of Religion-Based Masculine Domination, which was first published in 2023. It is a fabulous one-of-a-kind book that begins with the MeToo movement and the abuse of religious power in the Catholic Church, and then presents a concise selection of ancient case studies that illuminate and account for some of the reasons why rape culture today looks the way it does. The book demonstrates how a specific construction of the relationship between sex/gender, power and religion not only excludes women and every other person conceived as feminine or effeminate from power but also produces – almost automatically – a rape culture that uses and excuses violent sexuality as an appropriate manifestation of masculine power. Joachim constructs what he calls here ‘the Zeus Syndrome’ and draws examples from Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek and Roman worlds and texts. It’s such an invigorating read!

How do you reflect back on writing your book? 

It was a great adventure – not least, because I had never written a complete book in English before. Furthermore, it was a challenge, as the topic of masculine domination involves my self (including my roles as professor and priest) and my self-understanding as a man.

What has been the response to your book?

Although I wrote mostly about men and the question of masculinity, most responses have come from women. Those who have contacted me directly love the book and cherish it as enlightening and liberative. 

How and where are you now and what are you doing or working on at present?

I am still at the University of Bamberg, working in New Testament studies and on the Bible in Africa studies project (which I co-founded in 2009). My retirement is around the corner, and I am happy that my successor will be a female scholar of high reputation.

Do you have any advice for authors of future publications in this series?

Not really much. Everyone has to find their own way. It is important with a series topic like this (rape culture and religion) not to shy away from getting your self involved and to let yourself be challenged. 

What topics in the area of rape culture, religion and/or the Bible would you like to see a book on?

I would like to see a book on the images of Christ as rapist in Revelation and on their biblical prototypes in prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible. [Johanna: Joachim has just explored some dimensions of this topic in his chapter on the book of Revelation for Bible and Violence (forthcoming with Bloomsbury).]

Do you have a shout-out to anyone working in this general area? Please shout about them!

Maybe Canisius Mwanday could write about the distressing topic of abuse of female bodies and corpses and how the Bible has functioned in such abuse. It is a shocking topic but one we should not ignore. 

[Johanna: Canisius Mwanday: if you are interested in proposing a book for the series, please get in touch.]

Joachim’s book is available from Routledge. It is soon to appear in paperback. Like the eBook version, this will cost just under £16. 

read more

Introducing the Contributors to “The Bible and Violence” – Barbara Thiede, Holly Morse and Adriaan van Klinken

Bible picture with a 'warning' sign.

Happy New Year! Year 2023 will be a busy year for The Bible & Violence Project. Today we introduce three more contributors. Each of them demonstrates why this project is relevant and important, and why research-based activism matters. We are happy to introduce Barbara ThiedeHolly Morse, and Adriaan van Klinken. (Reading about these three contributors in turn, we think they should meet!).

Barbara Thiede is an ordained Rabbi and Assistant Professor of Judaic Studies at the UNCC (University of North Carolina Charlotte) Department of Religious Studies in the USA. Her work focuses primarily on the structures of hegemonic masculinity and the performance of masculinities in biblical texts. She is the author of Male Friendship, Homosociality, and Women in the Hebrew Bible: Malignant Fraternities (Routledge, 2022) and Rape Culture in the House of David: A Company of Men (Routledge Focus, 2022). She is currently working on her third book (under contract with Bloomsbury T&T Clark), which focuses on the biblical deity’s performance of masculinity in the Books of Samuel. She will be writing the chapter on Violence in the David Story and co-authoring, together with Johanna Stiebert, a chapter on the Ethics of Citing Violent Scholars.

I argue in my second monograph, Rape Culture in the House of David: A Company of Men, that David’s capacity for sexualized violence is not only tremendous but very much valorized in and by the text; and it is exactly this capacity, which (in terms of the ideological orientation of the text) makes him an ideal king. But David does not act alone (rapists don’t). Hegemonic masculinity and the structures that support and promote it make rape culture possible and make it thrive. Male-male relationships of all kinds in the David story undergird and support sexual violence. Servants, messengers, courtiers, soldiers, generals, advisors – these men collude and participate in, condone, and witness sexual violence throughout the narrative. Rape is not so much a topic as a tool – and it is used against men as well as women. If we cannot call out the violence the Hebrew Bible authorizes, we give our tacit consent to the rape culture it presents and by extension, to the rape cultures it legitimates and which we ourselves inhabit.

For the same reason, I cannot ignore an ugly reality in academia: that there are scholars who commit violence through sexual harassment, bullying, and rape; scholars who have participated in technology-based gendered violence, and who have preyed on children. These are scholars whose presence in our midst confronts us with fundamental questions about the nature of our guild. Hegemonic masculine systems have protected such scholars from censure and criminal conviction for decades. Together with Johanna Stiebert, we want to ask: do our ethics permit us to cite the work of violent predators?

We cannot afford apathy, indifference, or denial; we cannot afford to collude or condone. It is our task to resist violent texts and violent authors – especially when these are given authority and power to harm and abuse. Doing so might provide some healing and hope. And: it is an ethical imperative.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Holly Morse is Senior Lecturer in Bible, Gender and Culture at the University of Manchester in the UK and specialises in the Hebrew Bible and gender-based violence, as well as in biblical reception – especially visual and popular cultures. She also has broader interdisciplinary research interests in knowledge, magical and spiritual activism, heresy, and gender. Holly is author of Encountering Eve’s Afterlives: A New Reception Critical Approach to Genesis 2-4 (Oxford University Press, 2020). In this book, she seeks to destabilise the persistently pessimistic framing of Eve by engaging with marginal, and even heretical, interpretations which focus on more positive aspects of the first woman’s character. Holly has also written on biblical literature, gender, feminist activism, trauma, abuse, and the visual arts and popular culture. Holly is co-founder of the Bible, Gender and Church Research Centre, with Dr Kirsi Cobb (Cliff College). Together they are now working on an AHRC (Arts and Humanities Research Council) funded research network around the topic Abusing God: Reading the Bible in the #MeToo Age.To date they have hosted one colloquium focused on coercive control, with another on hypermasculinity due to take place in April 2023. Holly is writing on Gender-Based Violence in Visual Art on the Bible.  

Survivors and victims of gender-based violence frequently attest to feeling that they have been left voiceless and silenced, as a consequence of the actions of their attackers, but also of the social systems which fail to provide them with support and with justice (see Jan Jordan Silencing Rape, Silencing Women, 2012). This theme of voicelessness is present, too, in the troubling texts of terror in the Hebrew Bible – the narratives of Dinah and the Levite’s pilegesh, or the law of the nameless, captive, non-Israelite “brides” of Deuteronomy 21; these texts and many more feature characters who are denied a voice in the wake of brutal attacks on their bodies and on their personhood. A growing field of powerful scholarship within biblical studies acknowledges and explores the significance of witnessing the silent trauma of these accounts across the centuries. It is into this conversation that I hope my paper for the Bible and Violence project will speak, but this time focusing on a different aspect of witness and gender-based violence – visibility. 

Despite the fact that 1 in 3 women globally are subject to physical and/or sexual violence, the harrowing frequency of these offences is met with a woeful rate of conviction rendering the majority of gender-based violence against women and girls invisible, hidden crimes. This lack of visibility of the abuse of women is further compounded by the fact that around 90% of rapes are committed by acquaintances of the victims, and often within the broader context of domestic abuse and intimate partner violence. In many ways, the Hebrew Bible too elides violence against women. With no specific language for rape, with laws that seem to accommodate abuse of female persons, and with accounts of what likely describe violent, sexual attacks on women mired in euphemism and narratorial disinterest, trying to render biblical survivors and victims of gender-based violence visible to the reader is often a challenge. In my paper for this project, I want to think about how visual art can help or hinder us in acts of witness to the experiences of biblical women at the hands of their abusers, and in turn offer opportunity to think further about tools for moral and ethical readings of ancient authoritative texts in our contemporary world.


Adriaan van Klinken is Professor of Religion and African Studies at the University of Leeds, where he also serves as Director of the Leeds University Centre for African Studies and the Centre for Religion and Public Life. He also is Extraordinary Professor in the Desmond Tutu Centre for Religion and Social Justice, University of the Western Cape, South Africa. Adriaan’s research focuses on religion, gender, and sexuality in contemporary Africa. His books include Kenyan, Christian, Queer: Religion, LGBT Activism and Arts of Resistance in Africa (2019); with Ezra Chitando, Reimagining Christianity and Sexual Diversity in Africa (2021); and with Johanna Stiebert, Sebyala Brian and Fredrick Hudson, Sacred Queer Stories: Ugandan LGBTQ+ Refugee Lives and the Bible (2021). 

Sebyala Brian (left), Adriaan van Klinken (centre) and Fredrick Hudson

In recent years, I’ve had the privilege to work, together with my colleague Johanna Stiebert, with a community of LGBTQ+ refugees based in Kenya. Most of the refugees originate from Uganda and left that country in the aftermath of its infamous Anti-Homosexuality Bill, which created a strong social, political and religious culture of queer-phobia. They sought safety in Kenya, only to discover that this country, too, is largely hostile towards sexual and gender minorities. 

From my first encounter with this community, back in 2015, what struck me was their faith, and the strength and comfort this gave them in the struggle of their everyday lives. As I was invited to prayer and worship meetings at the shelter run by a community-based organisation, called The Nature Network, I observed first-hand how these LGBTQ+ refugees created a space where they affirmed each other, shared their faith, read and talked about the Bible, and joyfully expressed their belief in God. 

Together with two of the leaders of the Nature Network, Sebyala Brian and Fredrick Hudson, Johanna and I developed the Sacred Queer Stories project. Here, we aimed to explore the intersections of bible stories and the life stories of Ugandan LGBTQ+ refugees. More specifically, we examined the potential of reclaiming the Bible and using it to signify the queer lives of LGBTQ+ refugees in East Africa. This is important because, in the words of one of our participants, “The Bible is often used against us, but in this project we reclaim it as a book that affirms and empowers us.” The results of the project were published in our jointly authored book, Sacred Queer Stories: Ugandan LGBTQ+ Refugee Lives and the Bible.

In our contribution to the Bible and Violence project, we will build on our collaborative work with the community of LGBTQ+ refugees, to explore the strategies of creative and contextual bible reading that we developed in order to read the Bible against queer-phobic violence. We will show how the Bible, on the one hand serves to reinforce existing power structures and social inequalities, but on the other hand can also be used for purposes of community empowerment and social transformation. Indeed, we put our Sacred Queer Stories project in the well-established queer tradition of ‘taking back the Word’, not allowing the Bible to be owned by homophobic preachers and politicians, but to reclaim it in a quest for liberation and freedom. As a case in point, we will discuss the work we did around the story of Daniel in the lions’ den, which in our project was re-narrated and dramatized in the contemporary context under the title “Daniel in the Homophobic Lions’ Den”. 

read more

Q&A with Joachim Kügler about his new book

There is a new volume in the Routledge Focus series ‘Rape Culture, Religion and the Bible’! The title is Zeus Syndrome: A Very Short History of Religion-Based Masculine Domination, and the author is Joachim Kügler, who has featured earlier on the blog as one of our 2019 activists (see here).

Tell us about yourself. How does this book fit into your work more widely and how did you come to write this book?

I am a professor of New Testament studies with particular interest in religious history and topics of gender. Alongside this, I am also an ordained priest of the Catholic Church, and I am upset and outraged about the many scandals of clerical sexual abuse. This book has grown out of a decision to use my academic skills to find some answers to how such abuse happens – not only in the Church but in multiple social spheres. My first step was to go to the Egyptian and biblical source materials that I knew and to investigate the intersections of masculine domination, sexuality, and religion. I try to inform readers beyond the inner circle of academia to better understand what is going on and why. 

What is the key argument of your book?

The key argument is that we have to overcome masculine supremacy if we want to create a new kind of sexuality that serves as a language of love. As long as sexual activities and symbolisms primarily reflect and promote dominant masculine power and the submissiveness and subordination of women and of men who are symbolically feminized, we will continue to see rape culture phenomena at the core of our social interactions.

Please give us a quotation from the book that will make readers want to go and read the rest.

My quotation is on the perils associated with sexuality: “Penetration in particular is often deployed as a body-sacrament of masculine domination, and as a means to subjugate women (and men). But the generalized demonization of sexuality cultivated by Christianity under Platonist influence is no solution; it is even part of the problem.”

read more

New Book: ‘Boys Will Be Boys, and Other Myths: Unravelling Biblical Masculinities’ by Will Moore

Book cover of 'Boys will be Boys and other myths' by Will Moore

The Shiloh Project caught up with Will Moore, to discuss his new book Boys Will Be Boys, and Other Myths: Unravelling Biblical Masculinities, with SCM Press.

Hi Will, tell us a bit about you. 

Hello! My name is Will Moore. I’m an ordinand (training to be a priest!) in the Church of England at Westcott House in Cambridge, and will be beginning a PhD in September with the Cambridge Theological Federation and Anglia Ruskin University, focussing on constructing a trauma theology of masculinities under the supervision of the fantastic Dr Karen O’Donnell. I’ve also studied for previous degrees with Cardiff University. And, of course, I should say that I’m the author of Boys Will Be Boys, and Other Myths: Unravelling Biblical Masculinities, published by SCM Press.

How did this book come about and how does it relate to your work and interests and passions more widely? 

During the final months of my MTh degree, I completed my dissertation which focussed on using queer theory and theology to resolve a seeming tension of divine masculinities, particularly looking at God and Jesus, in the Bible. (A much-reduced version was later published with the Journal for Interdisciplinary Biblical Studies.) During this time, the coronavirus pandemic began and I was stuck inside my university home for more than I had planned. Having been captivated by masculinity studies, and with my final dissertation completed earlier than expected, I let my brain keep on thinking and I continued to write. I knew the insights of masculinity studies needed to break into the popular and accessible Christian imagination, as feminist theology had done in recent decades, and I thought this might be the perfect opportunity for where such a process could begin. 

My previous work has been mostly focussed on gender, sexuality, and violence, and how they intersect with the Bible and Christianity. Some of this has taken a particularly academic shape, but as someone working in and with the Church, I have always valued theological work being accessible and meaningful for Christian communities. This book, then, combines my commitment for academic rigour as well as theological accessibility with my research interests.

Can you tell us more about the title, and about “unravelling biblical masculinities”?

The title ‘Boys Will Be Boys, and Other Myths’ sets the structure and main argument of the book. Each chapter uses a biblical man (from Adam and Moses to Jesus and his disciples) as a springboard for conversation around masculinities, in the biblical worlds as well as for modern readers. It tackles myths of masculinity such as men’s presumed entitlement to power and authority, the necessity to endure without any sign of vulnerability, their inability to express emotion or talk about mental health difficulties, and a reluctance to show intimacy towards other men. Such myths of masculinity seem to persist through so many times and cultures.

What is clear throughout this book is that masculinity, or more accurately masculinities in their plurality, are not and cannot be clear cut. They are slippery, messy, and tangled up in so many other wider conversations. As such, the subtitle ‘unravelling biblical masculinities’ acknowledges that there are no definitive answers to understanding masculinities in the Bible and modern world for Christians. This book is simply an attempt to begin to ‘unravel’ and untangle some of the key characters, themes, issues, and interpretations that are on offer – this unravelling is certainly not exhaustive. Instead, I hope my contribution is the beginning of a wider conversation on men and masculinities at a grass-roots level for Christians and church communities. 

What are the key arguments of your book? 

As well as tackling myths of masculinity outlined above, the central claim I make is that masculinities are just that: a plurality of gender performativities (as Judith Butler would have it). Within that plurality, there is so much breadth and diversity. We can see that in the societies around us, as well as even in the biblical texts. There is no singular way to be a man that is coherently proposed in the Bible; rather, we find that God takes, uses, and adores men just as they are. Therefore, the claim that we should enact a ‘biblical’ or ‘Christian’ masculinity or manhood is a tricky and dangerous one to make, for masculinities in the Bible and Christian living are too complex and intricate to be pinned down to one particular way of being. If we acknowledge this, we are invited to read scripture again and see the flawed, troubled, and trying men in our Bibles staring back at us and reflecting much of what it means to be men today too.

Image of Will Moore
Will Moore, author of ‘Boys Will Be Boys and Other Myths’

Who is the book for and what would you like your readers to take away from reading your book? 

My book aims to be as useful to undergraduate and postgraduate university students looking into the application of gender studies in theology and biblical studies as it should be for Christians, church leaders, and intrigued spiritual wanderers. It’s a broad readership to try to cater for, but I hope my book contains as much scholarly insight as it does personal stories, popular culture, and humour!

I have always said that not everything in this book will please everyone, but I hope that each reader has something that they can take away. In honesty, I expect that this book might shake up at least one myth or misconception about masculinity or the Bible that the reader might hold – it might not give them the solution that they are looking for but will perhaps provoke them enough to search further.

What activities do you have to promote the book? 

I’m excited to say I have lots of speaking and media appearances coming up to talk about the book which you can find on my website or Twitter, but I’m most looking forward to the two wings of my book launch. One will be held in St John the Baptist church in Cardiff on Fri 9th Sept at 7pm and another in Cambridge (and on Zoom) on the 5th Oct at 7pm. I will be in conversation with a different set of scholars and practitioners at each event and I can’t wait to meet others intrigued in the book. Copies will also be available to buy on the nights. Free tickets for both events can be reserved on Eventbrite (see links here and here). 

Give us a short excerpt from the book that will make us want to go read more! 

This is from my introduction:

 “Phrases like ‘boys will be boys’ have reverberated around the walls of school halls, family homes, locker rooms, and courts of law for far too many years in British society, with their justification wearing a little thin. In a country where seven times more men are arrested for crimes than women, unhealthy traits found in modern masculinities have caused men to inflict violence on those close to them as well as their surrounding communities. Yet, simultaneously, an inward bound violence to manhood and men themselves is being perpetrated, where three times as many men are committing suicide than women. Toxic masculinity in modern Western society is a poison which, whilst infecting those who encounter it, is crippling the very hosts that keep it in circulation. Men truly have become their ‘own worst enemies’.”

What’s next for you?

I’m excited to begin my PhD in September, as well as continue my ordination training for two more years before beginning ordained ministry. I hope to keep following my two-fold calling of ministry and theological education – who knows in what form! This book coming about was such a surprise to me, that I can honestly never guess what’s in store next.

read more

Q & A with Rabbi Dr. Barbara Thiede about her book Rape Culture in the House of David: A Company of Men

The latest volume in our Routledge Focus Series is out! It joins a string of carefully focused examinations of how rape culture and religion intersect. The focus of this volume by Rabbi Dr. Barbara Thiede is on the characters of the David story in the Hebrew Bible’s Books of Samuel. More volumes will follow later in the year. If you would like to propose a volume, please read more about our series here, and contact Johanna ([email protected]).

Tell us about yourself. How does your book relate to your work as a whole and how did this book come about?

I am a professor of Judaic Studies at UNC Charlotte in North Carolina (USA) and an ordained rabbi. My work studies the male alliances, friendships, and networks that undergird biblical hegemonic masculinity. My first bookMale Friendship, Homosociality, and Women in the Hebrew Bible: Malignant Fraternities, explores how male relationships are engendered by the sexual use and abuse of women’s bodies. 

Rape Culture in the House of David: A Company of Men focuses specifically on the many men — from kings, princes, and courtiers, to generals, counsellors, and servants — who are complicit in the taking and raping of women in the Books of Samuel. I also examine male-on-male sexualized violence in biblical rape culture.

My next book, Yhwh’s Emotional and Sexual Life in the Books of Samuel: How the Deity Acts the Man, will be published with Bloomsbury Press. In that work, I directly address a topic that I began exploring in my previous books: the Israelite deity’s emotionally fraught and sexually charged relationships with his chosen men.

What are the key arguments of your book? 

I argue that the Books of Samuel present the reader with a powerful depiction of an ancient rape culture, in which the best king proves his right to the throne through powerful and exhibitionist displays of sexual violence. I contend that rapists in the Hebrew Bible do not act alone; they are enabled and supported by a company of men.

What do you hope readers will take away from your book?

I hope readers will feel empowered to call out these texts for the rape culture they depict. If they can do so with the Bible, they will be better able to identify any and all depictions or enactments of dominant, exploitative masculinity in our own time. It is equally important to me that readers become conscious of the ways in which biblical literature has legitimized toxic forms of masculinity.

Please give us a quotation that captures something significant about your book and will make readers want to read the rest. 

“[M]en of the texts, who aspire to honor their rulers, must emulate, support, collude, and enable them. The taking and raping of female characters and the intentional sexual humiliation of male ones do not constitute merely a backdrop to political events. Such deeds are political. They constitute the core of the narratives… Rapists are supported by a company of men, even an army of them.”

Update (15 November 2022) – for a review, see: https://www.tikkun.org/rape-culture-in-the-house-of-david-book-review/

read more

Becoming a Pauline Scholar

Today’s post in the Pushback series is from Grace Emmett (King’s College London). Grace recently defended her PhD thesis on the topic of the apostle Paul’s masculinity. You can find out more about her research on her Humanities Commons page, or by following her on Twitter.


I recently defended my PhD thesis on Paul and masculinity, entitled ‘Becoming a Man’, a nod to 1 Cor 13:11 wherein Paul claims to have ‘become a man’. Essentially, my thesis turns this claim into a series of questions: what sort of man does Paul become, and what’s the process by which he negotiates masculinity? Once the corrections are out the way I will, apparently, have become something myself: a Pauline scholar.

I say ‘apparently’ for two reasons. First, I am hardly expecting an ontological change to happen when I take on the title ‘Doctor’. I will not suddenly transform into a person who has expertise relating to Paul; rather, that knowledge has been curated over a number of years and will always be a work-in-progress. Second, despite finishing the thesis and passing my viva, I still struggle to view myself as a ‘proper’ Pauline scholar.

So why exactly is this a struggle? I am hardly the first person to have experienced imposter syndrome, after all. And yet the nature of my imposter syndrome does, I think, have some specific ties to the nature of my research. Researching masculinity has often felt like a peripheral pursuit within Pauline studies, an experience no doubt true for many others employing modes of analysis that go beyond a strict historical-critical approach. This happens in explicit ways—a comment left online, for example, mocking my research and signed off simply with ‘1 Timothy 2:12–14’. But this impression of being on the fringes asserts itself in more subtle ways too: either when others seem genuinely confused about what a study of Paul’s masculinity might entail, or, at the other end of the spectrum, when those who feel strongly about defending a particular version of Paul’s masculinity feel compelled to interrogate my methodology in a manner that amounts to ‘methodsplaining’.[1]

Serving as a counterpart to the term ‘mansplaining’, ‘methodsplaining’ functions as a form of gatekeeping, whereby proponents of traditional research methods (e.g. historical-critical) determine what is and is not a legitimate research approach. This is more than just something that happens on a one-to-one level; it is fundamental to the way that we cultivate knowledge within biblical studies. Method gatekeeping happens from the outset in terms of what we privilege teaching to students when they first embark on a biblical studies degree, through to the way we structure opportunities to present in academic spaces, like the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature. It doesn’t take long to notice the units that have a ‘marked’ interpretive approach (e.g. ‘Feminist Hermeneutics of the Bible’), in contrast to those that are ‘unmarked’ (e.g. ‘Pauline Epistles’).

Even the means by which one accesses these types of academic spaces is already structured in such a way that it is easier for some rather than others to participate. In the course of the global struggle with the coronavirus pandemic, events offered in a virtual format have demonstrated that greater accessibility is possible when participation is not restricted to those who can only attend in person. As such, the cancellation of the international meeting of SBL (rather than migrating it online) has denied many researchers residing outside of the States a more accessible opportunity to participate in the Society this year—a fundamental reason why the international meeting exists in the first place.[2]

More commendable is SBL’s recent announcement that the annual meeting will be offered in a dual format, with some sessions offered virtually and others in-person.[3] Although not the hybrid format many of us had hoped and asked for, it is, understandably, going to take some time to work out what the ‘new normal’ is for large-scale conferences and how we can move forward in a way that prioritises inclusivity. In the long term, offering virtual participation will benefit a whole host of individuals: disabled scholars, pregnant scholars, scholars with caring responsibilities, unvaccinated scholars, and many others for whom international travel is restrictive—to say nothing of the environmental cost of requiring some members to fly thousands of miles to participate.

Failing to prioritise inclusivity limits the potential richness of biblical studies. Attending to who is able to participate in academic conversations about biblical texts is interwoven with how those texts are studied. Denise Buell explicates this relationship well when she writes:

It is thus of crucial importance to attend to what is habitual and routine in our methods and approaches and not only to the ‘body count’ of who gets PhDs, appointments, tenure, and promotion. That is, attention to who participates at the undergraduate, graduate, and faculty levels in New Testament and early Christian studies matters but always in the context of the very shapes and orientations of the spaces, physical and intellectual, in which this work unfolds. Reorienting the fields of biblical and early Christian studies is an undertaking that also requires deep engagement with the histories of our interpretive approaches and willingness to adopt new perspectives.

Buell is here primarily writing about the way whiteness is intertwined with New Testament and early Christian studies (and see Ekaputra Tupamahu’s recent essay for how whiteness informs particular research topics, such as the Synoptic ‘problem’). Buell’s helpful observation about the intertwining of the who and the how has also been a useful prism for me to reflect on gendered dynamics within Pauline studies.

The way that masculinities research has felt peripheral mirrors the way that I as a woman can feel peripheral in academic spaces. It is hardly necessary to repeat here that biblical studies remains a male-dominated guild (with 75% of its members identifying as men in the most recently available statistics). And so it is not a surprise that this manifests in ways such as being asked if I’m the wife of the male colleague I’m standing next to at a conference drinks reception. Or being told by a senior scholar early on in my PhD to be prepared for the fact that if I presented on Paul in a forum like SBL that some men might actually get up and leave, unwilling to accept that a woman might have something worthwhile to say about Paul. Simply being warned about the potential of such dynamics in an academic context made me wonder how welcome I and my research were in such spaces, ludicrous as such a warning seemed.

There are two scripts of normativity at work here: one sketches out the contours of what a biblical scholar should look like (which extends beyond gender of course), while the other gestures to how a biblical scholar (perhaps particularly a Pauline one) should conduct their research. While one might expect that these undercurrents of masculine- and method-normativity are most consistently embodied by men, women are by no means immune from enacting these scripts too. In some ways, it is as a result of the actions of other women that I have felt most undermined. There is one particular incident that sticks out in my mind that I would eventually come to label as misogynistic, and it was reading Hindy Najman’s essay ‘Community and Solidarity: Women in the Academy’, recommended by a friend, that helped me finally give that particular incident a name. It is this quote in particular that I’ve turned over in my mind many times since: ‘We need to watch the behaviour of women against women, even by those who write treatises against sexism. We are all vulnerable and we are all capable of acts of violence’.

It is for all these reasons, then, that I often do not feel like a ‘proper’ Pauline scholar. ‘Proper’ is, of course, doing a lot of unspoken work in that sentence, guided by the scripts of masculine- and method-normativity to dictate what a model Pauline scholar should look like and how they should behave. But perhaps I can embrace being an improper Pauline scholar instead, with the hope that what constitutes ‘proper’ Pauline scholarship might itself become a more exciting, expansive, and inclusive proposition. In this sense, I hope I add to the ‘body count’, as Buell puts it, when it comes to gender diversity. But more than that I hope that my work adds to the ‘manuscript count’, as it were, contributing to other longstanding efforts to interrogate how our field is constructed and imagine how it might be reconstructed.


[1] Thanks to Dr Chris Greenough for introducing me to this term, coined by sociologist Dr Jane Ward.

[2] It is wonderful news that STECA is planning to offer an alternative forum for those who had papers accepted at ISBL to present.

[3] The efforts of Professor Candida Moss and Dr Meghan Henning were instrumental in encouraging SBL to reconsider its original plans for a solely in-person meeting format.

read more