According to the Oxford Dictionary honour (noun) implies:
1. High respect
2. Pride and pleasure from being shown respect
3. A clear sense of what is morally right
4. A person or thing that brings credit
Neither of the above-mentioned acts was morally right (even though the goonadas of Sri Ram Sena claimed their intentions were in line with Hindu morality) or respectful (thrashing, molesting or murder of another human being indicates high disregard for feelings and rights of others)…These acts were plain criminal and were about power and control…
From where did the concept of women as vessels of religious, cultural, societal and familial reputations arise? It arose from men…Why are these crimes excusable and understandable? Because men say so…Across religions and cultures, women have always been looked upon as the property of men and not as human beings… If men (as they contend) are so concerned about their (own) honour, why aren’t they responsible for protecting it? Why should only women embody the honour of the men to whom they "belong"? Why can’t men embody the honour of the women in their family and community? Why aren’t rape, honour killings, alcoholism, adultery and domestic violence considered dishonourable and immoral? Again, because men say so…
Everything is ultimately about control…The need to curb and control the rights of women arose from the need for men to ensure that their children were biologically theirs…For some reason, (most) men consider name and bloodline to be the most important thing in the world…
This attitude of women as property of men is even enshrined in the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
Section 497: Adultery
Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rap, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall be punishable as an abettor.
Section 498: Enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman
Whoever takes or entices away any woman who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of any other man, from that man, or from any person having the care of her on behalf of that man, with intent that she may have illicit intercourse with any person, or conceals or detains with that intent any such woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
So, how does one resolve this situation? Will education do the job? Well, all this time I thought so (and still do) until I read this story:…
Two politicians accused of brutal attitudes towards women have been made cabinet ministers in Pakistan, causing outrage among human rights activists.
Mir Hazar Khan Bijarani, charged with presiding over a "jirga" that gave away five young girls as a form of compensation, and Israr Ullah Zehri, who recently made international headlines after defending the burying alive of women in "honour-killing" cases, have been elevated to ministry positions.
Last year the Supreme Court ordered the arrest of the Oxford-educated Mr Bijarani over the allegations, though he remained at liberty. He has been made minister for education…
…Mr Zehri, a member of a minor party in the coalition, has been made minister for postal services. Earlier this year, in response to news that three teenage girls had been buried alive for trying to choose husbands, he told the parliament it was a "tribal tradition".
I still think education is important (and by this I don’t mean just learning how to read and write) but it has to be ‘backed-up’ by legal protection….Unless the current laws are changed, things will not improve…
The rule “You never hit a girl/woman ever” may seem antiquated but it still holds true…When will men realize that?
