I'm happy to help, Abraham.

In Ezekiel 16:7, God looks at a naked woman. There is no religious violation. God does not avert His eyes. He looks.

Since divine behavior is often read as a model for Christian behavior then we could find in this verse a prompt to examine naked women. Perhaps they really ought to be appreciated!

About Song of Songs 4:1, Israelite women weren't veiled. The word "veil" in 4:1 is a well-known problem in Christian translations. It's a rare word and whatever it means, it doesn't appear to impede sight of the woman, as her features are being appreciated. The LXX translated it as "silence" (or "taciturnity") and key Jewish rabbis thought it meant "hair." The Bloch translation, on which I centered my post, has this for 4:1:

"The doves of your eyes looking out
from the thicket of your hair."

Robert Alter's translation of 4:1 has this:

"Your eyes are doves
through the screen of your tresses."

The word "bride" that you find in English translations is another act of interpretation. The word means "totality" or "wholeness.” The man may be saying that the woman “completes him.”

Some traditions had it refer to a "bride" while acknowledging it doesn't really refer to a wedding or marriage, or require that the two people be together in any ongoing way.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/9163-kallah

About Matthew 5:28 you're absorbing more Christian propaganda. In the Bible, adultery is not a result of "lust.” It's a term in property law and refers to a theft of a woman. The woman is viewed as property and represents the resources of her family. In the Bible, to marry a woman is often to inherit money, a kingdom, her gods, etc.

The theme of OT narratives is property, property, property. But then in the midst of that, the Song had a unique focus on desire.

See this paper:

https://www.academia.edu/77553377/The_Decalogue_as_the_Prohibition_of_Theft