So called honour..

Sometimes the best turn of phrase to get us angry about a situation is one that deliberately is a bit wrong or contentious

That was the point I was making. It is attention grabbing and it ought to be.

I'm stunned LRD can twist what I said to come up with "that unless you are someone who regularly considers carrying out and/or sanctioning honour killings," which is one of the nastiest comments I have ever read on here.

I'm not sure - maybe we're just more used to hearing killed, but surely if a person is deliberately ending another person's life, that is murder? Kill is a more general verb which also include accidental death of execution. Murder is very definitely the intention to kill someone unlawfully.

Or are we just used to the idea of murder as a one-to-one event, and can't process the idea of 23 people murdered?

Still, definitely the media don't use murder all the time when it most definitely was.

Yes, interesting. I wonder why that is? Maybe because of the political angle or because of the number of victims?

I've also noticed that when there are terrorist act, the word kill is used rather than murder.

So - after Nice, there were headlines about no. of people killed, when really murdered would have been more accurate.

Hmm maybe so-called honour murder would work better.
As well as disliking "honour" I also think killing gives the tone of an execution and again, the impression the woman somehow bought being murdered on herself somehow.
I really dislike the whole thing as a concept and I feel we've picked up that cultures explanation in our description of the murders. It's a difficult one.

It is an interesting thread and I've just thought of something else.

Sometimes the best turn of phrase to get us angry about a situation is one that deliberately is a bit wrong or contentious.

So when you hear 'black lives matter', a part of your brain goes 'of course they do, all lives matter'. Then this makes you look at the issue more deeply and realise that a proportion of people are treated like they don't count as real people because they are black. The phrase deliberately causes outrage, it jars on purpose to engage your brain.

Same with 'honour killings '. Reasonable people hear the phrase and go 'there is nothing honourable about mobbing a woman and murdering her.' It gets us talking and challenging the culture around it. For the vast majority of the population this is obvious but maybe there is a brother or an aunt or there who has never heard this concept be challenged. Its people on the fringe of the culture who need to hear our contempt and outrage over honour killings because they are in the strongest position to help rescue the next victim.

Left off the list the point well-articulated by several PP, about the issue of using a word that usually has a positive meaning, even in inverted commas, to describe something so fundamentally opposite to that meaning.

Hmm. Sorry, I'm not being very helpful.

Thank you for this thread, which encapsulates a lot of the ideas I've been trying to reconcile.

I wouldn't wish to normalise the concept of murder for this reason (any reason, actually, but we're talking about this one).

But as little said, this is a particular type of murder which often involves a group acting together, including women. It's important to acknowledge the motivation, the better to combat cause. "Premeditated domestic murder" doesn't capture this.

I also take LRD's point, that it's not great to be feeding a quaint "othering" of gendered violence, which helps us pretend gendered violence only belongs to certain cultures.

For the time being, I think I'd go with KickAssAngel at 04:27:02 - headline as a murder; explain as a "so-called-'honour' murder".

Watching this discussion with interest.

Murder has been a verb for centuries. I agree with you that 'kill' suggests this is something different from 'murder'.

I also agree that there is a gendered double standard over which killings (all put down, by the perpetrators, to concepts such as izzat or honour) deserve to be translated as 'honour killings'.

I do wonder to what extent all of this is also because of the way we're relatively comfortable, as a society, with quaint and othering terms for gendered murder in the context of Islam, because it allows us to believe that is all hugely and categorically different from the kinds of gendered violence that occur in the non-Islamic bits of society.

I am putting that badly, but perhaps you see what I mean!

I always have a problem when the word killing is used instead of murder.

People are killed in accidents, like car crashes. They are murdered when another person deliberately has the intent to kill them. I know that historically one was a noun and the other a verb, but language can be flexible, particularly when using a noun as a verb, so murder can be a verb, or we can use the phrase committing murder.

the Telegraph today has an article about one man murdering another because of disrespecting Islam. The word murder is used. I do think the phrase could become 'honor murders' which is more accurate.

I tend the think of the phrase "honour killing" a bit like "ethnic cleansing". The phase helps to give you an idea of the motivation behind the murder. In both cases it is hatred against a particular group of people. So the phrase itself is kind of helpful in identifying the root cause - and without identifying that I don't know how we could fight against the attitude.

YY, kick, I think that makes good sense.

I think the majority of the article (online or on TV) should refer to murder, with maybe a sentence about how it's thought this was a so-called honor murder due to a woman not being sufficiently obedient.

'Premeditated domestic murder' doesn't adequately convey all this phenomenon entails, and isn't specific enough.

Something like 'patriarchal control murder' is the most concise phrase I can think of which comes close. I don't object to the media using 'so-called "honour" killing' as part of the reporting as whether we like it or not that's the term people are familiar with.

You've not explained anything to me - I've not posted on this thread before

I have explained in earlier posts on this thread. I repeated the explanation in my reply to you. I did not mean nor even say "explained to you ". I had assumed you had read the whole thread.

No spin, just reading your posts and rather shocked.

You've not explained anything to me - I've not posted on this thread before.

I would prefer that the BBC keeps reporting "honour killing" as I would prefer the BBC to keep reporting if there are people or societies who think "honour killing" is a legitimate concept.

I've no idea how you managed to spin what I said into your rather nasty comment about missing a bit of "grief porn" - whatever that might be. Possibly means something to you?

As for turning this into what I personally might want to read I would prefer as many people as possible to read about these murders and be horrified that there are families who think honour killing (ie no inverted commas) is justified. If the use of the term in the BBC uses it does so then I do not have an issue with that.

lass, unless you are someone who regularly considers carrying out and/or sanctioning honour killings, I do not understand why you think it's so incredibly important that the media should use words that tempt you to click on stories about murdered women?

I have explained this before and explained it again. Your post is extremely offensive and twists what I said. I would also refer you to Little's and Enthusiasm's posts since you seem to have a problem interpreting mine.

I agree, 'honour killing' is a poor phrase.

lass, unless you are someone who regularly considers carrying out and/or sanctioning honour killings, I do not understand why you think it's so incredibly important that the media should use words that tempt you to click on stories about murdered women?

Personally, if I read about murdered women, I feel awful and angry (and I try to do something about the wider culture if I possibly can). I don't think 'aww, damn, missed a nice bit of grief porn there cos they didn't use the term I like!'

Perhaps I am reading you wrongly, but I am slightly gobsmacked by the way you've managed to imply the choice of terminology should really be all about you and your preferences when browsing the papers.

Hmmmm lass you may wish to re read my words because I don't think that you understood that I was agreeing that the honour killings should be re named as murder

I'm still not sure what point you are making. No one here has said they are not murders.

Along with not calling familial murder of women because they have transgressed arbitrary views of "honourable" behaviour by women. honour killings, it might be nice to call all violence by men again women and children just that: Violence against women and children.

"Honour killings", "domestic killings", "family annihilators", "terrorists", "paramilitary actions" are all predominantly male violence, hence when women perpetrate any of the above they are scrutinised more heavily.

No such thing as an honorable murder

No one has said anything like that. Nor has the BBC. That petition is misguided and misses the point of why the BBC is using the term.