Her incredulous reading is not part of popular consensus, but she feels this is an obvious case of someone flirting in order to possibly marry an heir to the throne. It’s an imaginative take on the story that reconfirms the “blame the victim mentality” even in modern cases of rape. There are many interpretations of Tamar’s story that choose to forensically examine the Hebrew. Others have simply said that it is simply part of a succession tale. David was cursed for his actions with Bathsheba, and here is one of the consequences (Laffey 123). How are we to read it?
“Who would want to marry one’s rapist, especially under the circumstances as they are here described? Yet not to do so meant an even worse fate. The culture from which Tamar’s character emerges gives her no choice. To the extent that the text is interpreted from either a historical or literary perspective, the horror of the victimization of women is trivialized. Interpreters are quick to point out that the rape is avenged—Absalom later kills Amnon. These …show more content…
Coming from a different camp, Alan Segal claims that stories in the Bible functions as myth, and were meant as explanations to people in those times, not ours (12). The story functions to show the perils of inter-marriage and demonstrate the future consequences of David’s actions. Judith Plaskow would take Segal to task by having a perspective from within Judaism:
“Women are Jews, but we do not define Jewishness. The central Jewish categories of Torah, Israel, and God all are constructed from male perspectives…Exploring these categories, we explore the parameters of women’s silence” (3). “Not only is the Bible uninterested in the reactions of a raped girl married to her attacker (Deut. 22:28-29) or the feelings of a wife accused of adultery by an unfaithful husband, it does not acknowledge the existence of such points of view”