Warning: this article contains graphic descriptions of the murder of women by their domestic partners.

This form of deadly male violence cuts across every single country and culture on the planet. It cannot be acceptable anywhere.

Whilst I agree with that closer, the (opinion) article seems to attack the argument that I've never heard anybody defend, namely that somehow western femicide is presented as somehow superior over eastern honor killing.

The article argues that western men get away more due to them presenting the case not as a honor killing, but as a reaction, therefore getting off with manslaughter instead.

But the way that this works, supposedly, is that even though honor isn't mentioned, not litigated, the ancient ideas of honor are still instilled in the justice system.

The strange thing is that the argument tries to conjure up a dichotomy between east and west, where it comes to femicide, but that the western side hides it's numbers somehow due to the way lawyers argue the case.

That might be true, but it's a bit of a silly argument, as of course the defending counsel would obviously try to argue their cases in the way most beneficial to their clients.

So the last sentence of the article is about the only point that's made, I do fully agree that femicide is despicable, whether it's in the east or the west. So just that sentence is sufficient, doesn't need the rest of the article at all, imho.