A Queer Reading of Ruth: Reading From the Underside of Scripture

Estimated reading time: 19 minutes

Be aware that this article includes references to abuse, assault, and rape. As usual, this article and all my work represent my own views and are not an official Salvation Army position.

Ruth is not really a love story, even though people have turned it into one. The more you read it, the more you will say how it reveals the problems in ancient and modern society. When we take a queer reading of Ruth, we will see the methods by which women have been oppressed, and how relationships have been misunderstood.

This was a difficult place for me to land. I’ve spent years preaching on Ruth as a beautiful love story. A story where we can see how faithfulness results in God’s plan coming to fruition, with Ruth becoming an ancestor of King David and thus also of Jesus. I’ve preached on how Ruth’s outsider status was overcome, and I’ve also taught how we can use the story to see same-sex relationships in the Bible.

But I was confronted with the darker heart of this story. The truth that had been hidden by the fairy tale. Something that is so often the case in a story of abuse. But where we might want to keep the happy story, we can’t if we want to be faithful to scripture, and to take seriously the pain that people who are in abusive relationships have to endure.

What Do I Mean By Queer?

The word ‘queer’ has been used to mean different things at different times, from being a derogatory slur, to a badge of belonging. I am using it in a very specific but multifaceted way in this article.

First, I am using the word to describe possible ways of reading Ruth that position the characters’ relationships outside of heteronormativity. Whether that is the potential same-sex relationship between Ruth and Naomi, or the suggestion that Ruth, Naomi, and Boaz formed a triad. The relationships that may exist in this story can be considered ‘queer’ in the difference they pose.

Queerness can also be about belonging, particularly the kind of unorthodox tendencies which can leave people outside the ‘norm’ of a group. Their behaviour, choices, and sometimes simply who they are, leave them outside of the group. We can see that in the decision Ruth takes to stay with her foreign mother-in-law rather than go back to her people. We can also see in the decisions of Naomi and Boaz around Ruth’s marriage.

Queerness can also be seen in the intersection of race, gender, and economic situations that lead to oppression and abuse. The difference and otherness of Ruth leaves her vulnerable to being preyed on, as we will see throughout this story.

Even if Naomi and Ruth did not have a sexual relationship, this story is still queer because it offers a story of outsiders, of difference, and of challenges to normativity.

I think there is definitely space to read the story of Ruth as a love story, especially as a story about how two women form a relationship despite their otherness, and how this difference is eventually overcome, with everything resolving in a happy blended family and a polycule.

But I also think that this misses the point of the story. I think that just because you can read it that way doesn’t mean you should. The book of Ruth is a much darker story than we normally like to admit. That’s what we are going to see in this article.

A Queer Reading To Reveal Oppression

I think the context of Ruth matters. It is set during the time of the Judges, when life was pretty awful. The author of Judges reminds us of this at the beginning and the end of the story, and repeatedly throughout. Judges 21:25 says:

25 In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes.

This is a time when the strong rule over the weak and people did whatever they wanted. A key point to remember is that lament for a lack of a king is not only about a human ruler. In fact, that isn’t really what this verse is about.

God was meant to be Israel’s king, but in that time Israel had abandoned God for local gods. And so they did whatever they wanted.

It is in this context that we should read the story of Ruth. It is only superficially a love story.

The Tragic Use of Ruth in Oppression

The book of Ruth both reveals the oppression of women and has been used to oppress women.

Such is often the way with the Biblical texts that are actually highlighting abuse; they get twisted and used to hurt others, especially women.

Phillis Tribble tells the story of how a young woman in the Philippines attempted to escape poverty by becoming a “dancer” and, when questioned about her choice, cited the story of Ruth as justification.

She also highlights examples from South Korea in which brides were required to pledge allegiance to their mother-in-law rather than form a new family. The bride had to recite Ruth’s pledge to Naomi to their own new mother-in-law. You can read about both examples here.

In the text itself we see the ways that Ruth is oppressed and used by the people in her life. Her identity is subsumed into serving Naomi’s needs. Her body, and her safety, are offered up to Boaz in the hope of securing long term stability and security.

In the rest of the article I’m going to unpack then way that Ruth was treated and oppressed in the story. But while you are reading the story, I invite you to think about the people today. Maybe people you know, but also the tens of thousands of women you don’t, who are in similar situations to Ruth.

Was Ruth Forced Into Marriage?

Even before we get to Ruth marrying Boaz, we can ask whether Ruth had much choice in marrying Naomi’s son.

The Hebrew word used for marriage in Ruth 1:4 is similar to the word used in Judges 21:23. In both those situations, the word could be translated as a ‘rape marriage.’ The word used in the text is rarely used to refer to marriage.

It is only used in Judges, Ezra, Nehemiah, and 1 & 2 Chronicles. In Ezra and Nehemiah, the word is used to describe the marriage of foreigners. In Chronicles, the word just means marriage.

But in the passage from Judges, it is used in the story of the tribe of Benjamin abducting and forcibly marrying women from another tribe. The linguistic evidence is mixed, but it is possible. I think that, given the context in which Ruth is being written, specifically set in the time of the Judges, the use of the language is important and is a way the author is trying to tell us what is going on.

Right from the beginning, Ruth’s agency is minimal. She is potentially forced into a marriage with Naomi’s son. Then stuck following Naomi. Then again compelled into a sexual relationship for the sake of another.

In this sense, we should read Ruth’s relationship to Naomi as what Wil Gafney calls ‘sexploitation’ rather than either friendship or romance. Naomi, the older, childless widow, exploits the younger, still-fertile Ruth to secure her own well-being.

[Gafney, Wil 2009 ‘Mother Knows Best: Messianic Surrogacy and Sexploitation in Ruth’, in Mother Goose, Mother Jones, Mommie Dearest, Cheryl Kirk-Duggan and Tina Pippin (eds), Atlanta: SBL, pp. 23-36.]

Ruth, faithful and dutiful in the extreme, is exploited and used for the well-being of Naomi. The story can just as easily be seen as a story of sex trafficking as it can one of romance and faithfulness. Is it any wonder that people prefer to dress up this story as a romance rather than face its uncomfortable reality?

Ruth Cleaves to Naomi

Ruth and Naomi have a rare opportunity to make their own decisions. They are not tethered to a husband or father. They can choose for themselves. But they can only do so because they have also lost their status as a mother and a daughter-in-law. They have nothing to hold them together except shared pain, yet each chooses to remain together. Or do they? We will return to that question in a moment.

A question to ask is whether Ruth had anywhere to go home to? Orpah could return home. Was Ruth able to go home? Did she have anywhere to go?

When Ruth makes her commitment to Naomi, Naomi does not respond. In fact, when Naomi arrives in Bethlehem, she does not introduce Ruth to anyone. Instead, Ruth is identified as the Moabite. Her difference, her otherness, is what defines her in that place.

There is one way of reading this story that highlights the relationship between Naomi and Ruth. The language used to describe Ruth staying with Naomi is the same language used in Genesis to describe when a woman leaves her family to be with her wife. There is clearly an unusual relationship between Ruth and Naomi. It is entirely possible that this was sexual. However, I think the way the story progresses makes it clear that this was not romantic. If anything, it is abusive.

The desire to turn Naomi and Ruth into a love story is as dangerous as the desire to turn Ruth and Boaz into a love story. We may want a happy ever after at the end of the story. But we are not going to get it unless we ignore the reality of the story. Ruth’s relationship with Naomi is one that will always have a power imbalance, one that will always be formed from economic necessity, and one that will always be rooted in survival.

Post-Colonial Reading of Ruth the Slave

Laura E. Donaldson, a scholar of Cherokee descent, highlights the dangers of using the story of Ruth to promote assimilationist views. She says that if Ruth’s promise to adopt the culture and faith of her mother-in-law was systematically applied, it would lead to the destruction of indigenous culture.

Which is, of course, what happened to the Native Americans when White settlers pushed into their territory. In this reading, Ruth is not a brave protagonist, nor is the story about diversity. Ruth could be seen as a collaborator with the enemy. In contrast, it is Orpah who returns to her family and should be emulated.

We also need to consider how Ruth is essentially subsumed by Naomi’s character throughout the story. Again and again, Ruth is used by Naomi for Naomi’s benefit. Naomi uses Ruth’s otherness, her difference, and her fertility, for her own benefit, while giving nothing back to Ruth. Even Ruth’s ultimate safety still depends on Naomi and Boaz.

The Racial Otherness of Ruth

The Israelites characterised the Moabites as being sexually promiscuous, especially Moabite women. They also looked down on the Moabites for their supposed ancestry in the origin narratives of Hebrew patriarchs.

We can see that in Genesis 19:30-38:

30 Now Lot went up out of Zoar and settled in the hills with his two daughters, for he was afraid to stay in Zoar, so he lived in a cave with his two daughters. 31 And the firstborn said to the younger, “Our father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the world. 32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, so that we may preserve offspring through our father.” 33 So they made their father drink wine that night, and the firstborn went in and lay with her father; he did not know when she lay down or when she rose. 34 On the next day, the firstborn said to the younger, “Look, I lay last night with my father; let us make him drink wine tonight also; then you go in and lie with him, so that we may preserve offspring through our father.” 35 So they made their father drink wine that night also, and the younger rose and lay with him, and he did not know when she lay down or when she rose. 36 Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father. 37 The firstborn bore a son and named him Moab; he is the ancestor of the Moabites to this day. 38 The younger also bore a son and named him Ben-ammi; he is the ancestor of the Ammonites to this day.

And in Numbers 25:1-5:

While Israel was staying at Shittim, the people began to have sexual relations with the women of Moab. 2 These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods. 3 Thus Israel yoked itself to the Baal of Peor, and the Lord’s anger was kindled against Israel. 4 The Lord said to Moses, “Take all the chiefs of the people and impale them in the sun before the Lord, in order that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel.” 5 And Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Each of you shall kill any of your people who have yoked themselves to the Baal of Peor.”

Ruth is an outsider, a foreigner, and someone born outside of the covenant. Her otherness adds to the story’s queerness.

In Ruth 2:1-3, Boaz asks who Ruth belongs to. A truly patriarchal question. Except Ruth is temporarily outside of that system. She doesn’t belong to a man. She has given herself to Naomi.

In Ruth 2:6, Ruth is identified as the Moabite who came back with Naomi. Her identity is reduced to two things: her race, and her service to Naomi.

It has been suggested that the story of Ruth was intended as a critique of Israel’s approach to foreign marriage. This would be particularly true if the story were written during the time of Ezra-Nehemiah as a kind of moral parable, serving much the same function as Job.

In this sense, the story would be quite surprising to an Israelite reader. Ruth, a Moabite, turned out to be the hero of the story. In much the same way that the Samaritan was the hero of Jesus’s parable. This similarity is particularly sharply drawn since Deuteronomy 23:3-4 says that no Moabite can be admitted to the ‘assembly of the Lord.’

Then, when Ruth is revealed to be the great-grandmother of King David, this challenge to the policies of Ezra-Nehemiah is completed.

The way Ruth is treated throughout the story because of her race provides further context for this claim.

Uncovering Feet…

What’s up with feet?

Let’s talk about feet. The typical Hebrew word for feet is raglayim. The word used in Ruth is mergelot, and it appears only once elsewhere in the Bible, in Daniel. It is used only five times in the Bible, and four of those are in Ruth. The way the word is formed suggests it means “the place of the feet”.

However, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, translates the word in Ruth as “the things before his feet.” How does that relate to sex or genitals?

Because ‘feet’ is used as a euphemism for sexual organs in other parts of the Bible. Such as in Exodus 4:25; Judges 3:24; 1 Samuel 24:4; Deuteronomy 28:57; Ezekiel 16:25.

While this interpretation is disputed, it is generally accepted as being the way to read the word. Even if nothing explicitly happens in the text, the innuendo is implied, especially in the context of the threshing floor. More on the threshing floor later.

Was Ruth Trafficked?

Naomi instructs Ruth to seduce Boaz. I wonder how much agency Ruth had in that choice? If she had not managed to seduce Boaz, would anyone else have taken them in? Would they have been able to find a home?

As we have already seen, Ruth is an outsider. She is a Moabite, someone who is already assumed to be sexually promiscuous. Remember that the Bible says Moab was founded through sexual trickery in Genesis 19:30-38. So when Naomi tells Ruth to use sexual trickery to resolve this situation, there is perhaps more than a little racism going on here.

Naomi is telling Ruth, “go and take care of business so we’ve got somewhere safe,” because she knows Ruth has no other choice, and perhaps also because she assumes Ruth would naturally do this anyway, since she’s a Moabite.

Boaz warns his people not to harass Ruth when she is in the fields. Why would he need to do this unless she was at risk? Boaz is acting to protect Ruth, and, in doing so, the author of Ruth works hard to demonstrate that not only is Boaz obeying the Law by ensuring Ruth can glean from his fields, but he is also obeying the command to care for widows and orphans. We are meant to know how good Boaz is, and in this case, the way he treats Ruth is doing that work. But simply by going to those fields, Ruth is putting herself into danger.

We consistently see throughout the story of Ruth that Naomi is willing to use Ruth for her own safety. Naomi trades on Ruth’s fertility to regain her land and family. She is willing to put Ruth’s body, her position, her safety, at risk for her own security.

I wonder what you think of this story? Do you think it is too harsh to suggest that Naomi was trafficking Ruth? Do you think something else is going on here?

Ruth and Boaz on the Threshing Floor

Ruth is told by Naomi to prepare herself for Boaz by bathing, putting on perfume and nice clothes, and then going to Boaz once he was drunk and half-asleep. In other words, Naomi is telling Ruth to put her physical safety and her reputation at risk.

More disturbingly, the preparations are similar to what a bride would do before their wedding. Ruth is to present herself as a bride for a wedding, letting Boaz know exactly what is needed and wanted. This was not just a fling; this was a proposition. In fact, it was more than a proposition. It was a business deal.

But here is perhaps the point. What reputation did Ruth actually have? She was a Moabite, a people stigmatised for sexual excess, and she was a widow with no children, no land, and potentially no family except for her mother-in-law. She is an unlikely candidate for remarriage.

The likelihood is that if she did not find someone to take her him, she would have had to resort to sex work to survive anyway. Did Naomi play on this when she sent Ruth to Boaz? We can see this as sexual trafficking through economic oppression. Naomi and Ruth both needed to be taken into a family to survive, so Naomi uses Ruth’s fertility and availability to gain safety.

Perhaps Naomi is hoping that the encounter will lead to pregnancy and then Boaz will be forced to marry Ruth and take them both on. Naomi’s plan is at best incredibly risky. Although all the risk is being paid by Ruth.

What’s Up With Threshing Floors?

The threshing floor is not a place where women normally went. Except for a particular class of women. Prostitutes were known to go to the threshing floor, especially at the end of the day after the food and the drinking.

We can see an example of this in Hosea 9:1:

Do not rejoice, O Israel!
    Do not exult[a] as other nations do,
for you have prostituted yourself, departing from your God.
    You have loved a prostitute’s pay
    on all threshing floors.

Threshing Floors were generally large, outside stone floors, set out in a circle, with a low stone wall. They were places of social gathering and sometimes had markets, or were places where a local assembly would gather. They were also where music, dancing, and drinking would happen. It is also interesting to note that the Temple in Jerusalem was built over a threshing floor.

During the harvest, the threshing floor became a place of business. Loads of people would gather, goods would be sold, and in the evening there would be drinking and music and feasting for the workers. And where there is work, business, drinking, and lots of men working away from home, there were prostitutes.

You can read lots more about the history of threshing floors here if you’re interested in that sort of thing.

Seduction or Negotiation?

However, Ruth does not follow Naomi’s plan. Rather than trying to seduce Boaz, Ruth is just straightforward. She “uncovers his feet” and lies down. When challenged about who she is, Ruth is again straightforward. She sets out the plan. She is his “next-of-kin”, which, in that context, is the request to be redeemed by her kinsman. We will see what that means in a moment.

There is some wordplay going on here as well. In Ruth 2:12, when Boaz and Ruth are talking by the harvest field, Boaz praises Ruth for her willingness to leave her home and follow a new God. He specifically says that she has taken protection under YHWH’s wings, which is kenafayim in Hebrew. Then in Ruth 3:9, Ruth tells Boaz to cover her with his cloak – a phrase meaning marriage. Except for the word translated as “cloak,” kanaf means “wing.”

Ruth is calling back to the blessing Boaz placed on her for her willingness to accept Israel’s God.

In Ruth 3:10, Boaz praises and blesses Ruth because, rather than looking for younger or richer men to marry, she has followed the requirements and sought out her kinsman.

Ruth did what Naomi wanted, but relied on Boaz’s faithfulness to the Law rather than on her ability to seduce. Or did she? She uncovered him and lay down. Was there a double offer going on? Rather than seducing, she made clear what the offer was. She was payment in exchange for her and Naomi being redeemed.

Although, if we take this further, it is actually for Naomi to be redeemed. Ruth enters into this bargain for the sake of Naomi, although she will benefit from it as well.

What is a ‘Kinsman Redeemer’?

When Ruth calls Boaz her “next-of-kin”, that’s not the best translation of the word go-el. That word is better translated as Kinsman Redeemer.

In the Bible, a Kinsman Redeemer is a close family relative who restores people or property to their original family after they have been sold due to extreme poverty. The rules for this in the Torah come from Leviticus 25:25-28:

25 “If anyone of your kin falls into difficulty and sells a piece of property, then the next of kin shall come and redeem what the relative has sold. 26 If the person has no one to redeem it but then prospers and finds sufficient means to do so, 27 the years since its sale shall be computed and the difference refunded to the person to whom it was sold, and the property shall be returned. 28 But if there are not sufficient means to recover it, what was sold shall remain with the purchaser until the year of Jubilee; in the Jubilee it shall be released, and the property shall be returned.

In Ruth 2:20, Naomi recognises Boaz as one of their go’el, their kinsman-redeemers. But despite being aware of their circumstances, Boaz does nothing. Maybe he didn’t know who they were? Except Naomi was already acquainted with the women of Bethlehem. Maybe he felt it was someone else’s duty?

We see in Ruth 3:10-13 that Boaz had to check with another man, a closer relative of Naomi, to see whether he wanted to take on the role. That closer relative refuses to step in, and so Boaz acts as the Kinsman Redeemer for Naomi.

Note: It is for Naomi, not Ruth. And in Ruth 4:1-10, we see that Naomi’s land and family line are restored. Specifically with the baby that Boaz and Ruth conceive.

Who Did The Baby Belong To?

After Ruth gave birth to a child, Naomi became its mother. Sit with that for a moment. I wonder what that might make you feel?

Naomi took the child and held it to her bosom. Her daughter-in-law’s child was taken to replace the children that Naomi had lost. According to Deuteronomy 25:5-6, the child of a Levirite marriage would be her grandchild:

5 “When brothers reside together and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married outside the family to a stranger. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her, taking her in marriage and performing the duty of a husband’s brother to her, 6 and the firstborn whom she bears shall succeed to the name of the deceased brother, so that his name may not be blotted out of Israel.

Some have suggested that this is the moment when Naomi, Boaz, and Ruth form a kind of triadic or polyamorous relationship.

But I also wonder again how much agency Ruth had in this choice.

She had provided what Naomi had needed all along. A child, land, and a family. After Ruth gives birth, she does not speak again. We will come back to that. It matters.

Because while it does not affect a queer reading of Ruth, it does change that queerness from a loving and romantic relationship to one of domination and control over a foreign woman.

Why A Queer Reading Matters?

In the Bible, when women take centre place in the story, that story often ends up being about sex and reproduction. Have you ever noticed that once Ruth has given birth, she does not speak again in the rest of the story?

Ruth’s last words in the story appear in Ruth 3:17 and, characteristically, concern Naomi rather than herself. In fact, in Ruth 4, when the marriage is arranged by the city elders, not only is Ruth not present, but she isn’t even mentioned. She is just referred to as the woman that they compare to Rachel, Leah, and Tamar. The concerns of the men for fertility subsume the person of Ruth and reduce her simply to her capacity to create children.

But not even to create children for herself. But for Naomi. As part of the Kinsman Redeemer process. When the women of Bethlehem return Ruth’s child to Naomi, they praise Ruth for what she has done for Naomi. Her worth was defined by her ability to bear Naomi’s children and by her obedience.

God and the Ta Me Onta

This story has been named and claimed by every kind of agenda. From complementarians to radical feminists and de-colonial readings, the story has been pulled in all kinds of directions. Maybe you think I’m doing the same here.

The phrase Ta Me Onta comes from ancient Greek and means things that are not. Paul uses it in 1 Corinthians 1:28 to show how God uses the people that everyone else barely thinks are people at all to bring down the strong and the powerful.

Ruth is a story of someone who is part of the Ta Me Onta. Someone that others thought had no value in themselves. But someone who God was with.

Ruth and the Ta Me Onta

We can see Ruth as the person who is oppressed and abused, but who still tries to exert agency in that situation. She chooses to follow Naomi, even though Naomi does not treat her as anything other than a servant. Yes, because she probably had no other choice. But she did what she had to do to survive.

Ruth went to the harvest field and took the risk of gathering food with the field workers. She identified Boaz and recognised his obedience to the Law. She used that to survive.

Then she obeyed Naomi and bargained with Boaz. But she didn’t try to pretend it was something it wasn’t. She turned it back onto itself and revealed it for what it was. This wasn’t a seduction; it was a negotiation. Ruth exercised the agency she could within the circumstances she faced.

This is the place where God shows up. These are the people that God identifies with. The ones who make difficult choices simply to survive and are vilified for it, who have their voices erased, and their stories turned into love stories because the truth is too difficult.

These are the people that God sides with. Especially against any institution or organisation that seeks to silence the reality of their experience, or one that tries to protect itself rather than the people at risk.

The church needs to make sure it is on the right side of the Ta Me Onta.

If you want to learn more about what The Salvation Army is doing to combat modern slavery and trafficking you can read about it here.

Reflection Space

A prayer to start: Almighty God, we ask that you open our eyes to suffering and injustice. Set free those people trapped by oppression and abuse, and tear down those systems and people that harm your children. Amen.

1 Corinthians 1:27-29

²⁷ But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; ²⁸ God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to abolish things that are, ²⁹ so that no one might boast in the presence of God.

When you read the story of Ruth in this way, what does it reveal to you about the world? How often do we turn situations of abuse into love stories to conceal them?

Sign Up to the MyTheologyCorner Newsletter Here

Sign up for the newsletter for free to get a weekly dose of Salvationist theology straight into your inbox. You’ll get a summary of that week’s main article, highlights about the Army’s work around the world, book recommendations, Bible reflections, and some doctrine teaching.