"The Sick Debate Over Beheading" The Daily Beast.

[Captain_Nemo]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-02-22/the-sick-debate-over-beheading/

"Why is it that some of the most brilliant feminist minds of our times view the murder of Aasiya through such different lenses?"

"Aasiya’s murder could serve to elucidate our country’s gravest societal crisis—violence against women. The problem is, her killing has touched off a debate among feminists on several fronts, including whether hers was an honor killing or domestic violence; multicultural relativism; Islamic violence on our shores; and whether we should even be speaking out about this particular murder in the first place. Yet in order for our country to start a much needed national dialogue on violence against women, the feminists of our country need to unite and work together on this most important takeaway—that a woman was senselessly murdered and the laws of our country could not protect her."

[rollingrock]

1. In many Muslim societies

honor killings of women are accepted aren't even against the law.

if a Muslim man beheaded his own wife in a Msulim country, he often receives little or no punishment from the law.
so the difference is, the murder of women is in effect sanctioned by the government so there's no deterrent against it as there is in the West.

[dustbunnie]

2. Hmmm...

Man in financial trouble becomes desperate. Wife, tired of beatings and perhaps spurred by family financial troubles, kicks his ass out. He threatens, she gets useless Order of Protection. Last convo they have is fight over child custody. Husband kills wife.

How is that scenario any different from the gazillion others that occur yearly? It's a typical American wife murder.

The only unusual aspects of the case are the particularly gruesome manner of murder, which is currently tied to practices carried out in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. This an honor killing it doesn't make. There may have been an ornamental sword or machete hanging on the wall within easy reach, or perhaps Mo didn't own a gun and used a big old kitchen knife. It's worthwhile to note that this man was a hypocrite of the highest order, promoting understanding within the community while he was throwing his wife around at home, finally killing her. The same flaying would be handed out to any prominent Christian... but that is all. There's no reason to suspect this was anything more than life as usual in America.

Spousal murder is definitely a terrible problem, but we don't need this couple to come to the conclusion it should be stopped. The story is great for its sensational details though.

[Captain_Nemo]

3. machetes usually aren't within easy reach. He killed her at her work.

I think " Honor Killing" is in play here. Just last week Phyllis Chesler had a good article published. "Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?"
http://www.meforum.org/article/2067

"When a husband murders a wife or daughter in the United States and Canada, too often law enforcement chalks the matter up to domestic violence. Murder is murder; religion is irrelevant. Honor killings are, however, distinct from wife battering and child abuse. Analysis of more than fifty reported honor killings shows they differ significantly from more common domestic violence.<1> The frequent argument made by Muslim advocacy organizations that honor killings have nothing to do with Islam and that it is discriminatory to differentiate between honor killings and domestic violence is wrong."

[dustbunnie]

6. I was thinking of an old Law & Order episode where the murderer -

had an ornamental machete hanging on the wall and used it in a fit of pique to kill and behead his ex-wife.

I'm certainly not defending honor killings. I did read the Chesler article and it was very good. To me, the differentiation occurs when economics come into play. Honor killings are usually the result of a family trying to stave off shunning, which means their businesses get no custom, the children won't find decent matches, etc... so the clan gets rid of the "offending" woman, the family's financial future and social station is restored, and all is well. Perhaps that's too broad and some patriarchs use honor as an excuse for sadism. But normally, I think those are the parameters.

The "usual" spousal murders we see here are one-man crimes, inspired for all kinds of reasons that don't necessarily involve family or community.

The husband's station was in financial trouble, ostensibly because he had been accepting controversial programming and moderates weren't happy. Perhaps he was more traditionally minded than it seemed, and felt he would no longer receive backing from generous middle eastern sources, or perhaps family back in Pakistan would suffer if there was a divorce. On the other hand, maybe he just went nuts because his children were going to be taken away, (as happens to American men as well) and murdered for that. I guess we'll only find out once the trial is over.

[Lyric]

7. But what if it wasn't solely about economics?

What if it was more about the dishonor of being thrown out of his home by a "mere" woman? In certain cultures, such a thing would be seen as an act of unmanning your husband, of making decisions in defiance of his home "rule," and as such, would require some kind of "honor" crime as retaliation and punishment.

I think this is a lot more complex than people are making it out to be. It's not just about the money.

[dustbunnie]

8. Again, not to diminish anything at all -

but that can be observed in your typical Western home as well. Even in our culture, women taking a man's children away, ending up with the home HE provided, can be enough to send a person into a frothing rage. And it's for the same reason. SHE usurped his control and position.

I'm not sure how often the victims of honor killings are actually wives. In other cultures, women can't divorce (I don't think). If they leave, they go with what's on their backs, and they have no legal claim to children. (Orthodox jewish women for example, can't get out unless she gets the Get which is at her husband's bidding.) If they're unfaithful the state officially kills them. Honor killings mostly involve uppity girls I believe. And of course, gay relatives, but assume those murders are carried out much more quietly.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

4. Of course the laws could not protect her; there is no way to change them so that they could have.

If someone a) cares enough about killing me that they are willing to give up their life to achieve it, and b) shares a house with me, no law will be able to protect me.

Also, murder is already against the law.

There may be some things that the state can do that could reduce the number of murders - "provide more refuges for battered wives" and "try to prosecute more wife-beaters", for example, although I suspect that's a lot easier to call for than to do - but in cases like this where there is (so far as I know) no history of domestic violence, I don't see any way the state could have protected her.

[Captain_Nemo]

5. There was a history of DV. And he wasn't living with her at the time. n/t