WE LOOKED AT THE DATA: Honor Killings and Husband Killings: What They Won’t Tell You.

Honor killing is actually a misnomer because there is no English equivalent for the word Namous. It has been translated as “honor,” but the two words do not carry the same connotation. Namous is committed out of a behavioral propensity found in some portions of Islamic cultures called Gheirat, which we will not bother explaining here but will mention that it is enabled and maintained by women too. Anyway, men being killed, lynched, or beaten for matters relating to Namous, or honor, as mentioned earlier, comprise almost all of the victims. So when I first saw the media reports representing honor killings as gender-based violence against women, I was surprised. Later I found out that the term “honor killings,” unlike its original phrase Ghatl haye Namousi, has been defined by the UN and feminists to exclude the overwhelming majority of its victims: men, many of whom were murdered by other men at the behest of women or sometimes directly by women. How did they do that?

Honor killings occur when the family members of a woman kill a man for matters violating honor; on very rare occasions, it has been seen that some families have killed their own female member. So here is the key contrast:

Male victims of honor killings are not family members of the perpetrators, whereas female victims of honor killings are family members of the perpetrators.

Guess what? Feminists have placed honor killings as a subcategory of familial killings! There you go: all male victims have simply evaporated by a single move of mental gymnastics.

The rest is quite interesting.