Remind me again why it's always women who get murdered in 'honour' killings?

[lechiffre55]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15334065/Teenager-tied-thrown-swamp-drown-honour-killing-Western-behaviour-shamed-family-father-flees-Syria.html

How do we live in a world where this happens in Western societies?
Why is it always women who get murdered?

Sounds more like she doesn't agree with it.

Wow, so 30% of men arrested for violent public order offences are.....violent. That's a shocker!

If that's what was meant it's as you imply, not shocking at all but the original wording gave it as 30% of all men present at the protest which does leave one wondering how one could arrive at that figure.

It can't be 30% of all attendees. Unless their identities were being logged and a CRB check undertaken. But why let the facts get in the way of a good old rant about men.

I find this post really diningenuous to the point of being dishonest.
There is no equivalent to 'honour' killings / murder in Western society. Possibly at a long stretch some Western guy very emotionally upset that his female partner is doing something he doesn't like reacting with extreme violence towards her. But that's called domestic violence or murder. There is no cultural phrase that tries to excuse it. No Western murderer ever tries to excuse murder as an 'honour' killing. There's also another significant difference in that 'honour' killing are not spur of the moment like a western domestic murder might be. They build over time as the family berates and tried to intimidate the women into changing the her behaviour. There's usually a lot of planning involved. Family members get involved in the murder. In the case in my OP the women had been on the radar of the police for protection, the father and sons got involved. This isn't anywhere close to a lone violent man lashing out, this takes planning and multiple family members. This is fundamentally a very different process carried out in a very different way to Western domestic violence. It is cultural and no western equivalent exists. No western man claims or is afforded any sort of defense to domestic violence or domestic murder based on 'honour'.
Your argument that there is more domestic violence comitted by white men in a country where white men are by far in the majority is willfully ignorant. When comparing rates of anything it's normal to divide rates of thing x by population. You end up with a per capita or normalised number which takes into account population sizes. Whenever I see someone arguing off base numbers ignoring population sizes on any subject I know that the person is trying to deflect and mislead. It's dishonest and obviously so.
No one is saying white domestic violence isn't an issue, and yet you are portraying the discussion of the cultural nature of 'honour' killings as a deflection from white violence against women. There's a logical fallacy called 'relative privation' where a person tries to deflect from an issue by citing a greater issue. The impliction being this bad thing you want to discuss isn't as bad as this other thing which is bigger so we should discuss that instead. It's pure deflection and a recognised logical fallacy with a name.
I reject everything you said in this post as being based in dishonesty.

Its the idea that the worst thing about talking about or highlighting this is the risk of being seen as racist, rather that the women and girls at risk.

If we cant talk about it, and we cant solve it.

It would be like if we talked about the failings in maternity care, and everytime someone pops up and says more elderly people are treated poorly in hospitals, why focus on mothers.

We can talk about specifics without losing sight of the whole picture.

At least 12 women a year are killed this way, how many are harmed in others ways, or are not living the lives they want. And its something that can be changed.

Read your post again

I would say the dynamics are the same

women won’t do what the men want

one is killing by a group of men and women

I bet there are loads we don’t know about!

“Possibly at a long stretch some Western guy very emotionally upset that his female partner is doing something he doesn't like reacting with extreme violence towards her”

how on earth is that a long stretch - happens daily?

It was a long stretch in that it possibly the closest I can think of to a western 'honor' killing. I then go to to explain why I don't think it's close at all. Both are extreme violence by men against women. But there is no 'honour' equivalent element in the west. If you read my post you'll get the answer to your question.
If you think you can make a better parallel to a western version of 'honour' killing go ahead.

I don’t need to because I agree with the other poster

I have actually heard of men getting killed in honour killings. Like forced marriage, it mainly affects women, but men are also sometimes affected.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-35800449#:~:text=She%20refused%2C%22%20the%20brother%20Vigneswaran,then%20fled%20on%20a%20motorcycle.&text=The%20young%20man%20died%20on%20the%20way%20to%20the%20hospital,should%20face%20the%20death%20penalty.

https://www.mmu.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/story/forgotten-male-victims-honour-based-violence#:~:text=by%20Dr%20Maz%20Idriss%2C%20Lecturer,those%20victims%20need%20help%20too.

For men,an honour killing might often be homophobic. Or caste based.

To a lesser extent, forced marriage & others occur in the Sikh & Hindu community, there were also previous reports of Sikh grooming gangs. Islam is rightly the main focus but we must be vigilant over all groups

We need to be vigilant over all men in all cultures especially white male Britain

In 2016, the Forced Marriage Unit apparently found 20% of victims were men. Obviously this is different from honour killings but it might be more men than we think.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a757137ed915d7314959fc9/Forced_Marriage_Unit_statistics-_2016.pdf

https://southallblacksisters.org.uk/news/beyond-promises-a-call-for-banazs-law-and-systemic-reform/

Southall Black Sisters arguing for the use of the term HBV, specifically because it would stop 'cultural sensitivity' being a barrier to protecting victims and prosecuting perpetrators, and could be an aggravating factor in sentencing

so, it was 40% of those arrested. Which leads me to conclude that the 'protect our women' rhetoric was just an excuse for violent racism- these men were themselves a danger to women

Agree. These 'honour' killings often seem to follow a particular pattern. They're not 'crimes of passion' taking place in dysfunctional relationships where the most common pattern of violence is bi-directional, like we see with western examples. They're frequently well planned and orchestrated.

Often the victim is persuaded to visit family in their 'home' country (although many were UK born) and they then get murdered by cousins/brothers etc. Often the mother/aunts are complicit because they also believe she deserved it. And often the authorities turn a blind eye, especially in cases where the law enforcement is local - e.g. tribal communities.

Going back to the white men thing, the reason so many white western feminists bag on white men is because they're the only demographic they can punch up against. Most of these women are second only in privilege to their husbands, whose wealth and status they benefit from by proxy (despite moaning about the inequality). It's much more problematic for them to criticise ethnic men because they're punching down from a place of privilege!

you think domestic homicides are 'spur of the moment lashing out'
and violence is 'bi-directional' ?

domestic violence was indeed very commonly excused in this country for cultural reasons- beliefs such as 'he was hen pecked' 'it's a private matter' 'what do you expect, he saw her talking to another man'- backed up by the religious instruction to wives to obey their husbands. See also, the lyrics to Delilah. In France, I believe 'crime of passion' was a defence in law when a man murdered his wife.

The small and slow gains we have made against these cultural and religious beliefs have only happened because of the hard work of feminists. Not because white, western men are inherently less violent and misogynistic.

I have no problem at all naming misogynistic violence when I see it regardless of the ethnicity or nationality of the perpetrator. HBV is just a particular flavour of woman-hating and it's useful to identify and name it.

you think domestic homicides are 'spur of the moment lashing out' and violence is 'bi-directional'?

That's what the studies seem to show. I'll try and dig them out from previous DV thread. The most common form of DV was bi-directional.

Here you go. Excuse the data dump. It's an interesting read and certainly challenges many of the things we take as 'accepted truth' without really looking at the data....

The theory that women perpetrate intimate partner violence at roughly similar rates as men has been termed "gender symmetry". The earliest empirical evidence of gender symmetry was presented in the 1975 U.S. National Family Violence Survey carried out by Murray A. Straus and Richard J. Gelles on a nationally representative sample of 2,146 "intact families". The survey found 11.6% of women and 12% of men had experienced some kind of intimate partner violence in the last twelve months, also 4.6% of men and 3.8% of women had experienced "severe" intimate partner violence.

Since 1975, numerous other empirical studies have found evidence of gender symmetry in intimate partner violence. For example, in the United States, the National Comorbidity Study of 1990-1992 found 18.4% of men and 17.4% of women had experienced minor intimate partner violence, and 5.5% of men and 6.5% of women had experienced severe intimate partner violence.[48][49]

In England and Wales, the 1995 "Home Office Research Study 191" found that in the twelve months prior to the survey, 4.2% of both men and woman between the ages of 16 and 59 had been assaulted by an intimate partner.q[50]

The Canadian General Social Survey of 2000 found that from 1994 to 1999, 4% of men and 4% of women had experienced intimate partner violence in a relationship in which they were still involved, 22% of men and 28% of women had experienced intimate partner violence in a relationship which had now ended, and 7% of men and 8% of women had experienced intimate partner violence across all relationships, past and present.[35]

The 2005 Canadian General Social Survey, looking at the years 1999–2004 found similar data; 4% of men and 3% of women had experienced intimate partner violence in a relationship in which they were still involved, 16% of men and 21% of women had experienced intimate partner violence in a relationship which had now ended, and 6% of men and 7% of women had experienced intimate partner violence across all relationships, past and present.[36]

The 1975 National Family Violence Survey found that 27.7% of intimate partner violence cases were perpetrated by men alone, 22.7% by women alone and 49.5% were bidirectional. In order to counteract claims that the reporting data was skewed, female-only surveys were conducted, asking females to self-report, resulting in almost identical data.[52]

The 1985 National Family Violence Survey found 25.9% of IPV cases perpetrated by men alone, 25.5% by women alone, and 48.6% were bidirectional.[53]

A study conducted in 2007 by Daniel J. Whitaker, Tadesse Haileyesus, Monica Swahn, and Linda S. Saltzman, of 11,370 heterosexual U.S. adults aged 18 to 28 found that 24% of all relationships had some violence. Of those relationships, 49.7% of them had reciprocal violence. In relationships without reciprocal violence, women committed 70% of all violence.

In 1997, Philip W. Cook conducted a study of 55,000 members of the United States Armed Forces, finding bidirectionality in 60-64% of intimate partner violence cases, as reported by both men and women.[55]

The 2001 National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health found that 49.7% of intimate partner violence cases were reciprocal and 50.3% were non-reciprocal. When data provided by men only was analyzed, 46.9% of cases were reported as reciprocal and 53.1% as non-reciprocal. When data provided by women only was analyzed, 51.3% of cases were reported as reciprocal and 49.7% as non-reciprocal. The overall data showed 70.7% of non-reciprocal intimate partner violence cases were perpetrated by women only (74.9% when reported by men; 67.7% when reported by women) and 29.3% were perpetrated by men only (25.1% when reported by men; 32.3% when reported by women).[56]

The 2006 thirty-two nation International Dating Violence Study "revealed an overwhelming body of evidence that bidirectional violence is the predominant pattern of perpetration; and this ... indicates that the etimology of ipv is mostly parallel for men and women". The survey found for "any physical violence", a rate of 31.2%, of which 68.6% was bidirectional, 9.9% was perpetrated by men only, and 21.4% by women only. For severe assault, a rate of 10.8% was found, of which 54.8% was bidirectional, 15.7% perpetrated by men only, and 29.4% by women only.[57]

In 2000, John Archer conducted a meta-analysis of eighty-two IPV studies. He found that "women were slightly more likely than men to use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently. Men were more likely to inflict an injury, and overall, 62% of those injured by a partner were women."[58] By contrast, the U.S. Department of Justice finds that women make up 84% of spouse abuse victims and 86% of victims of abuse by a boyfriend or girlfriend.[59]

From 2010 to 2012, scholars of domestic violence from the U.S., Canada and the U.K. assembled The Partner Abuse State of Knowledge, a research database covering 1700 peer-reviewed studies, the largest of its kind. Among its findings:[63]"

• More women (23%) than men (19.3%) have been assaulted at least once in their lifetime.
• Rates of female-perpetrated violence are higher than male-perpetrated (28.3% vs. 21.6%).
• Male and female IPV are perpetrated from similar motives.
• Studies comparing men and women in the power/control motive have mixed results overall.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men#:~:text=The%20theory%20that%20women%20perpetrate,Straus%20and%20Richard%20J.

Please consider reading this post from a woman subjected to this type of oppressive environment. Some of you above really need to read it.
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5453412-honour-based-abuse-my-experience-and-thoughts

Will give that a read in the morn when I have a spare moment. I've read some of Hirsi Ali's articles recently and she makes some interesting points about the misogyny in certain cultures. A lot of people on here don't seem to like her because she's a little to the right politically (and also because she's quite vocal about western feminists choosing to prioritise men rather than be seen to criticise a foreign culture, no matter how misogynistic that culture).

The small and slow gains we have made against these cultural and religious beliefs have only happened because of the hard work of feminists. Not because white, western men are inherently less violent and misogynistic

Is anyone saying it's inherent? It's surely cultural as viewing our own culture over time shows a change in how men behave towards women.

What I dislike is when people paint all men as the same regardless of the culture they come from in an attempt to be fair and to avoid any accusations. In doing that they're implying that all men are inherently a certain way regardless of their education, environment, culture etc. Yet the same people who do that are often the ones screaming about teaching men not to rape etc, which doesn't make any sense if they genuinely believed the culture men were in had no bearing on their relationship with women.

This!