Third of Jordanian teens believe 'honor killings' justified, study shows

[geriatrickid]

Please keep in mind that the results reflect the demographic mix of Jordan. Of the approximate 6 million people in the country, 4 million are "Palestinian" arabs who have a culture distinct from that of Jordanian arabs. I suggest then that the results reflect the views of "Palestinian" arabs more than those of Jordanian arabs. As such, the comments offered about "muslims" must be taken within that context. The "Palestian" arabs adhere to a more rigid interpretation of Islam than the Jordanian arabs. This is akin to comparing Church of England adherents to Roman Catholics. Both are Christians, yet each group has a different interpretation of Christianity.

do you know more about the study than that what the top entry says? or are your conclusions just pure speculation?

I have looked up the research. However, to be honest, I am unable to locate the specific article in the Journal of Aggressive Behaviour and as such can not properly comment on the methodology. Prof. Eisner is a reputable sociologist who was educated in Switzerland and is currently a professor of Comparative and developmental criminology at Cambridge. However, his comments are revealing;

"The sample is large enough to draw valid conclusions about adolescents in the capital of Jordan, Amman," Professor Manuel Eisner, the main supervisor of the study, told the BBC.

"We would expect that in the more rural and traditional parts of Jordan, support for honour killings would be even higher," said Professor Eisner.

Those two comments suggest to me, that the study methodology is flawed because it does not take into account the makeup of the Jordanian population and considers the entire population as homogeneous. Amman is about 75% Palestinian arab. Yes, it does reflect Jordan as it exists. However, unless there is a manner in which to differentiate the contributing factors on the measured perceptions, then the study is somewhat useless. It just says there is a problem.

This study will most likely be criticized by other researchers who will point out the flaw. I am not saying the study is wrong or that the data is incorrect. What I am saying is that incorrect conclusions can be drawn. For example, if we were to look at murder rates in Manchester and not to take into account age, income and cultural characteristics the data would be somewhat useless. By the same token, the Jordanian study des not take into account the presence of a culture that is very different than pure Jordanian culture. More specifically, if the views on honour killings are reflective of the Hizbollah, Hamas mentality rather than the very different Jordanian culture is it fair to describe it as Jordanian? I don't think it is fair to the Jordanians that's all.

Edited June 23, 2013 by geriatrickid

[Somtamnication]

Note to self: Do not move to Jordan.

[GentlemanJim]

Note to self: Do not move to Jordan.

And if you do, don't cheat on your husband!

[Jingthing]

Also keep in mind the honor killings are the tip of the iceberg of the social repression in these communities, as in general repression (and worse) against women, homosexuals, apostates, etc.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Jingthing

[antfish]

Please keep in mind that the results reflect the demographic mix of Jordan. Of the approximate 6 million people in the country, 4 million are "Palestinian" arabs who have a culture distinct from that of Jordanian arabs. I suggest then that the results reflect the views of "Palestinian" arabs more than those of Jordanian arabs. As such, the comments offered about "muslims" must be taken within that context. The "Palestian" arabs adhere to a more rigid interpretation of Islam than the Jordanian arabs. This is akin to comparing Church of England adherents to Roman Catholics. Both are Christians, yet each group has a different interpretation of Christianity.

do you know more about the study than that what the top entry says? or are your conclusions just pure speculation?

I have looked up the research. However, to be honest, I am unable to locate the specific article in the Journal of Aggressive Behaviour and as such can not properly comment on the methodology. Prof. Eisner is a reputable sociologist who was educated in Switzerland and is currently a professor of Comparative and developmental criminology at Cambridge. However, his comments are revealing;

"The sample is large enough to draw valid conclusions about adolescents in the capital of Jordan, Amman," Professor Manuel Eisner, the main supervisor of the study, told the BBC.

"We would expect that in the more rural and traditional parts of Jordan, support for honour killings would be even higher," said Professor Eisner.

Those two comments suggest to me, that the study methodology is flawed because it does not take into account the makeup of the Jordanian population and considers the entire population as homogeneous. Amman is about 75% Palestinian arab. Yes, it does reflect Jordan as it exists. However, unless there is a manner in which to differentiate the contributing factors on the measured perceptions, then the study is somewhat useless. It just says there is a problem.

This study will most likely be criticized by other researchers who will point out the flaw. I am not saying the study is wrong or that the data is incorrect. What I am saying is that incorrect conclusions can be drawn. For example, if we were to look at murder rates in Manchester and not to take into account age, income and cultural characteristics the data would be somewhat useless. By the same token, the Jordanian study des not take into account the presence of a culture that is very different than pure Jordanian culture. More specifically, if the views on honour killings are reflective of the Hizbollah, Hamas mentality rather than the very different Jordanian culture is it fair to describe it as Jordanian? I don't think it is fair to the Jordanians that's all.

So it is your own conclusion you just draw out of your hat?

What are "Palestinian arabs" in comparison to "normal" Jordanians? Are that 75% those who are opposed honor killings or are that 75% that third of young man and one fifth who think honor killings are acceptable.

What has Hezbollah and Hamas to do with it? are that ethnic or cultural entities?

The study looked at the social status, education and economic status as background factors.

and it is btw. not a study of murderers but just on who would say such honor killing is justified.

The 10-15 honor killing per year itself we are talking about here most likely happen in the tribal Bedouin communities.

Bedouin Jordanians or Jordanians of Bedouin descent are around 35-40% of the total population of Jordan.

I never heard that they are much into Hizbollah. But couldn't it be that those 35-40% are reflected in that one third of young males who believe honor killings are justified?

[Steely Dan]

@Geriatrickid

You may find this interesting, it would suggest that predominantly Palestinian population centers such as Amman do indeed have more honor killings than the tribal areas, but this may be down to better police enforcement in civic areas, whilst a wall of silence meets any investigation in rural areas. The attitudes of Jordanians is quite shocking to western eyes.

Honor killings are caused by how society views women. A 2011 study titled “Cultural and Legal Discrimination Against Jordanian Girls” polled the country’s main population centers (the capital Amman, Zarqa, Irbid, Mafraq, Aqaba and Karak) and found that 80.9% of parents believe that protecting the female equates to protecting the family’s honor.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/culture/2012/08/jordans-dishonorable-honor-killings.html#ixzz2X16t8pSa

So 4 out of 5 parents view the family honor and the behavior of it's female members are one and the same.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Steely Dan

[Jingthing]

It's definitely linked to social attitudes towards women, etc. As a western liberal, I am sorry, I have no tolerance for any cultural/religious/whatever group that oppress their women. Liberals get confused. They need to stand for something and hold firm to it. There is no excuse for oppressing women. It's traditional? Then the traditions are horrible and need to be changed. When such groups are Muslims, it is not Islamophobic to oppose their toxic social attitudes -- it is well reasoned opposition to a social evil. People are afraid to be labeled Islamophobic. That is silly. You should be afraid be labeled as weak willed apologist for severe oppression of women, etc. in the name of "tolerance" for cultural/religious/whatever differences.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Jingthing

[antfish]

@Geriatrickid

You may find this interesting, it would suggest that predominantly Palestinian population centers such as Amman do indeed have more honor killings than the tribal areas, but this may be down to better police enforcement in civic areas, whilst a wall of silence meets any investigation in rural areas. The attitudes of Jordanians is quite shocking to western eyes.

Honor killings are caused by how society views women. A 2011 study titled “Cultural and Legal Discrimination Against Jordanian Girls” polled the country’s main population centers (the capital Amman, Zarqa, Irbid, Mafraq, Aqaba and Karak) and found that 80.9% of parents believe that protecting the female equates to protecting the family’s honor.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/culture/2012/08/jordans-dishonorable-honor-killings.html#ixzz2X16t8pSa

So 4 out of 5 parents view the family honor and the behavior of it's female members are one and the same.

Indeed, interesting

"The geographic distribution of honor crimes indicates that they are not associated with modernity or religiosity, nor with social or ethnic factors. The main reasons why the crime rate differed geographically were population density and police effectiveness. Honor crime incidents were high in the capital, where a third of the Jordan’s population lives and where there is an active police force. The number of incidents drops in less populated provinces that have a tribal culture and where they deal with honor crimes away from the police and the judiciary, for fear of stigma."

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/culture/2012/08/jordans-dishonorable-honor-killings.html#ixzz2X1F15fcK"

[antfish]

It's definitely linked to social attitudes towards women, etc. As a western liberal, I am sorry, I have no tolerance for any cultural/religious/whatever group that oppress their women. Liberals get confused. They need to stand for something and hold firm to it. There is no excuse for oppressing women. It's traditional? Then the traditions are horrible and need to be changed. When such groups are Muslims, it is not Islamophobic to oppose their toxic social attitudes -- it is well reasoned opposition to a social evil. People are afraid to be labeled Islamophobic. That is silly. You should be afraid be labeled as weak willed apologist for severe oppression of women, etc. in the name of "tolerance" for cultural/religious/whatever differences.

How do you call it then if you continue to drag religion into it meanwhile the relevant studies discussed here suggested that it is not linked to religion?

Many Muslims are against honor killings and condemn them.

Edited June 23, 2013 by antfish

[Jingthing]

How do you call it then if you continue to drag religion into it meanwhile the relevant studies discussed here suggested that it is not linked to religion?

Let's not be naive. Are you suggesting that oppression of women is not massively prevalent in many/most Islamic nations and communities? Obviously there is a global diversity among Muslim people but there is no need to act like the problem doesn't exist. The discussion here was about the linkage between the honor killings and the oppression of women in general. I have also explained that rationally you cannot cleanly separate religion and culture, they work TOGETHER.

To wit:

http://www.meforum.org/378/the-rights-of-muslim-women

We have watched as official Islamization programs in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, the Sudan, and Afghanistan, among others, have led to serious violations of the human rights of women. Muslim conservatives in all Muslim countries, and even in nominally secular India, have refused to recognize women as full, equal human beings who deserve the same rights and freedoms as men.

Women in many Islamic societies are expected to marry, obey their husbands, bring up children, stay at home, and avoid participation in public life. At every stage of their lives they are denied free choice and the fundamental right of autonomy. They are forbidden to acquire an education, prevented from getting a job, and thwarted from exploring their full potential as members of the human community.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Jingthing

[antfish]

How do you call it then if you continue to drag religion into it meanwhile the relevant studies discussed here suggested that it is not linked to religion?

Let's not be naive. Are you suggesting that oppression of women is not massively prevalent in many/most Islamic nations and communities? Obviously there is a global diversity among Muslim people but there is no need to act like the problem doesn't exist. The discussion here was about the linkage between the honor killings and the oppression of women in general. I have also explained that rationally you cannot cleanly separate religion and culture, they work TOGETHER.

read post #60 by 7by7

and what it says there about "special-interest groups in our society" .

[antfish]

To wit:

http://www.meforum.org/378/the-rights-of-muslim-women

We have watched as official Islamization programs in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, the Sudan, and Afghanistan, among others, have led to serious violations of the human rights of women. Muslim conservatives in all Muslim countries, and even in nominally secular India, have refused to recognize women as full, equal human beings who deserve the same rights and freedoms as men.

Women in many Islamic societies are expected to marry, obey their husbands, bring up children, stay at home, and avoid participation in public life. At every stage of their lives they are denied free choice and the fundamental right of autonomy. They are forbidden to acquire an education, prevented from getting a job, and thwarted from exploring their full potential as members of the human community.

Getting the "wit" from Daniel Pipes Middle East Forum makes it even more obvious.

[Jingthing]

To wit:

http://www.meforum.org/378/the-rights-of-muslim-women

We have watched as official Islamization programs in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, the Sudan, and Afghanistan, among others, have led to serious violations of the human rights of women. Muslim conservatives in all Muslim countries, and even in nominally secular India, have refused to recognize women as full, equal human beings who deserve the same rights and freedoms as men.

Women in many Islamic societies are expected to marry, obey their husbands, bring up children, stay at home, and avoid participation in public life. At every stage of their lives they are denied free choice and the fundamental right of autonomy. They are forbidden to acquire an education, prevented from getting a job, and thwarted from exploring their full potential as members of the human community.

Getting the "wit" from Daniel Pipes Middle East Forum makes it even more obvious.

Forgetting the source, and I don't agree with everything Mr. Pipes has ever written either, can you state which part of the CONTENT of that quote does not reflect reality?

[Steely Dan]

antfish, on 23 Jun 2013 - 13:47, said:

How do you call it then if you continue to drag religion into it meanwhile the relevant studies discussed here suggested that it is not linked to religion?

I would also add that in sundry Islamic Countries the populace can be routinely whipped up into a frenzy after Friday prayers resulting in embassies being stormed, U.N compounds attacked and people being murdered. If the Imams who incite such behaviour were to instead state unequivocally that honour killing is forbidden in Islam the results would be dramatic. Instead conservative religious voices fight tooth and nail against any watering down of sharia law. If you pause to think why it's obvious, a woman who marries out is lost to their control, which terrifies them. This is why so many honour killings which take place in the west are down to women either having a non-Muslim partner, or for just behaving 'too western'.

[transam]

antfish, on 23 Jun 2013 - 13:47, said:

How do you call it then if you continue to drag religion into it meanwhile the relevant studies discussed here suggested that it is not linked to religion?

I would also add that in sundry Islamic Countries the populace can be routinely whipped up into a frenzy after Friday prayers resulting in embassies being stormed, U.N compounds attacked and people being murdered. If the Imams who incite such behaviour were to instead state unequivocally that honour killing is forbidden in Islam the results would be dramatic. Instead conservative religious voices fight tooth and nail against any watering down of sharia law. If you pause to think why it's obvious, a woman who marries out is lost to their control, which terrifies them. This is why so many honour killings which take place in the west are down to women either having a non-Muslim partner, or for just behaving 'too western'.

BUT, they like the latest phones and the oil taken out the ground for them provided by the folk they don't like.

[intrepidphil]

antfish, on 23 Jun 2013 - 13:47, said:

How do you call it then if you continue to drag religion into it meanwhile the relevant studies discussed here suggested that it is not linked to religion?

I would also add that in sundry Islamic Countries the populace can be routinely whipped up into a frenzy after Friday prayers resulting in embassies being stormed, U.N compounds attacked and people being murdered. If the Imams who incite such behaviour were to instead state unequivocally that honour killing is forbidden in Islam the results would be dramatic. Instead conservative religious voices fight tooth and nail against any watering down of sharia law. If you pause to think why it's obvious, a woman who marries out is lost to their control, which terrifies them. This is why so many honour killings which take place in the west are down to women either having a non-Muslim partner, or for just behaving 'too western'.

I caught a tv debate recently that touched on your point. An Islamic scholar claimed that western people whip themselves up into a frenzy by viewing too much anti-Islamic propaganda. Seemed like he had no idea about the indoctrination he and his fellow Muslims have received all their lives. I just searched some stats, take a look at this:

Jan 2009 - May 2013, that's just short of a four and a half year period, there were 518 Palestinian deaths caused by Israeli security forces, that's a average of about 116 per year, some combatants and others civilians, no data on the ratio but definitely not good. Now compare that number to deaths during a 2 year period in Syria, UN statistics confirm 92,901, that's on average, 46,450 per year. Ask pretty much anyone, (especially a Muslim), which is the bigger issue, see which one gets them foaming at the mouth. Blinkered insanity.

[7by7]

The issues surrounding the civil war in Syria are far to complex to go into here; and of absolutely no relevance to the subject anyway!

Civil wars don't just happen in Muslim countries.

[7by7]

More evidence to show the claims that honour killings are part of Islam is untrue.

Honour killings 'un-Islamic,' fatwa declares in wake of Shafia trial.

While it has no legal teeth, the fatwa is “morally binding” for all Muslims, said Syed Soharwardy, a Calgary-based imam who founded the council.

“So if anybody is thinking that honour killing is allowed in Islam, or domestic violence is okay or misogyny is okay, we are saying no, you are dead wrong,” he said Saturday in announcing the measure.

UK Muslims condemn honour killings

Inayat Bunglawala of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) told BBC News Online that the case was not symptomatic of a widespread problem in the Muslim community.

Many Muslims would understand Yones being upset by his daughter's apparent rejection of his faith, said Mr Bunglawala, but they would never condone his actions.

"It may have been disheartening to see his daughter growing up not with his value system but someone else's.

"But many Muslims are uncomfortable about how Islam has been dragged into this, because Islam categorically does not allow people to kill their own daughter," Mr Bunglawala said.

Honour killing: Couple who converted to Islam ‘killed by family’

LAHORE: A Christian couple, who recently married of their own will and converted to Islam, was gunned down by family members in South Punjab in yet another case of honour killing.

See also:-

Honour Killing; a Crime Against Islam

Honour Killing (from Inside Muslim Minds)

[Credo]

So the family of the Christian couple that were killed for converting to Islam receive any leniency in sentencing? I think not and I think that is the difference in what we are talking about.

Honor killings are institutionalized. Murder isn't.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts have been deleted. This thread is about honor killings in Jordan.

[7by7]

So the family of the Christian couple that were killed for converting to Islam receive any leniency in sentencing? I think not and I think that is the difference in what we are talking about.

Honor killings are institutionalized. Murder isn't.

Off-topic posts have been deleted. This thread is about honor killings in Jordan.

It appears I'm not allowed to answer your question.

[simple1]

Why is it that nearly every atrocity in the Islamic world is reported by the news forum in TV, but rarely reporting, if ever of evil in non Muslim societies? e.g. 5.4 million Congolese lives lost due to an ongoing civil war, and continue to leave 1,100 women raped every single day. This was recently highlighted by an international news organisation and not a mention. 14,000 women and women murdered every year in Russia due to domestic violence - again reported, but not a word on TV news forum. The list goes on and on...

Edited June 23, 2013 by simple1

[transam]

Why is it that nearly every transgression/atrocity in the Islamic world is reported by the news forum in TV, but rarely reporting, if ever of evil in non Muslim societies? e.g. 5.4 million Congolese lives lost due to an ongoing civil war, and continue to leave 1,100 women raped every single day. This was recently highlighted by an international news organisation and not a mention. 14,000 women and women murdered every year in Russia due to domestic violence - again reported, but not a word on TV news forum. The list goes on and on...

Shit is happening all over the world every day. We all know that, but the killing of the innocent on a daily basis because a book worldwide is the worlds Achilles Heel at the mo.

[7by7]

Except that, as explained to you many times, that book condemns such killings.

Have you read any of the links in this post?

[simple1]

Why is it that nearly every transgression/atrocity in the Islamic world is reported by the news forum in TV, but rarely reporting, if ever of evil in non Muslim societies? e.g. 5.4 million Congolese lives lost due to an ongoing civil war, and continue to leave 1,100 women raped every single day. This was recently highlighted by an international news organisation and not a mention. 14,000 women and women murdered every year in Russia due to domestic violence - again reported, but not a word on TV news forum. The list goes on and on...

Shit is happening all over the world every day. We all know that, but the killing of the innocent on a daily basis because a book worldwide is the worlds Achilles Heel at the mo.

What? 1,100 rapes a day in the Congo is kind of irrelevant. In Columbia 250k deaths in an ongoing civil war with millions displaced isn't worthy of debate in the world news forum on TV - just smacks of bias to me.

[transam]

Why is it that nearly every transgression/atrocity in the Islamic world is reported by the news forum in TV, but rarely reporting, if ever of evil in non Muslim societies? e.g. 5.4 million Congolese lives lost due to an ongoing civil war, and continue to leave 1,100 women raped every single day. This was recently highlighted by an international news organisation and not a mention. 14,000 women and women murdered every year in Russia due to domestic violence - again reported, but not a word on TV news forum. The list goes on and on...

Shit is happening all over the world every day. We all know that, but the killing of the innocent on a daily basis because a book worldwide is the worlds Achilles Heel at the mo.

What? 1,100 rapes a day in the Congo is kind of irrelevant. In Columbia 250k deaths in an ongoing civil war with millions displaced isn't worthy of debate in the world news forum on TV - just smacks of bias to me.

Since time began shit happens, every day in every country, EVERY country. Something we all know about. At this moment the innocent are being wiped out in Syria, so what are you doing about it?. Nothing, but some are talking, yes/no. Very different from folk being brain washed via a book to blow up kids all over the world. Or perhaps in some eyes it is not different, well, l can accept that as a thought but the book thing is senseless and the leaders of the followers cannot or will not do anything to teach the wrong doing.

[Ulysses G.]

Bad things happen everywhere, but radical Islam is a threat to the whole wide world. That is why it gets so much attention.

Edited June 23, 2013 by Ulysses G.

[F430murci]

Why is it that nearly every transgression/atrocity in the Islamic world is reported by the news forum in TV, but rarely reporting, if ever of evil in non Muslim societies? e.g. 5.4 million Congolese lives lost due to an ongoing civil war, and continue to leave 1,100 women raped every single day. This was recently highlighted by an international news organisation and not a mention. 14,000 women and women murdered every year in Russia due to domestic violence - again reported, but not a word on TV news forum. The list goes on and on...

Shit is happening all over the world every day. We all know that, but the killing of the innocent on a daily basis because a book worldwide is the worlds Achilles Heel at the mo.

What? 1,100 rapes a day in the Congo is kind of irrelevant. In Columbia 250k deaths in an ongoing civil war with millions displaced isn't worthy of debate in the world news forum on TV - just smacks of bias to me.

There you go again, using problems in other countries to minimize or rationalize actions of a Muslim country.

RE: Extent of true problem

Why should we even believe for a second that countries like Jordan maintain and report accurate numbers of honor killings? I would agree though that Jordan is on same level or lower than savages in many brutal countries like Congo.

RE: Religion

Obviously people will do everything they can to say that killing of women under such circumstances is not condoned by or driven by their religious beliefs. Duh! Amazing some cannot comprehend motivations and reasons for such argument. Denial is a dangerous thing on issues such as these.

RE: Other countries

I am sure everyone would chime in about such issues in Congo if there was a topic on this, but alas the topic here is Jordan.

[F430murci]

Bad things happen everywhere, but radical Islam is a threat to the whole wide world. That is why it gets so much attention.

No, we are just picking on those poor champions of human rights. Has nothing to do with the way they treat their own people or target and kill innocents around the world. Where there is smoke there is fire and denial only perpetuates the problems.

I personally am sickened by people or cultures that accept zero blame for their actions and continually blame others for their heinous acts. Yes, Russia, Mexico and Columbia have serious issues but they man up to the table and don't blame other countries and cultures for their problems.

[geriatrickid]

Please keep in mind that the results reflect the demographic mix of Jordan. Of the approximate 6 million people in the country, 4 million are "Palestinian" arabs who have a culture distinct from that of Jordanian arabs. I suggest then that the results reflect the views of "Palestinian" arabs more than those of Jordanian arabs. As such, the comments offered about "muslims" must be taken within that context. The "Palestian" arabs adhere to a more rigid interpretation of Islam than the Jordanian arabs. This is akin to comparing Church of England adherents to Roman Catholics. Both are Christians, yet each group has a different interpretation of Christianity.

do you know more about the study than that what the top entry says? or are your conclusions just pure speculation?

I have looked up the research. However, to be honest, I am unable to locate the specific article in the Journal of Aggressive Behaviour and as such can not properly comment on the methodology. Prof. Eisner is a reputable sociologist who was educated in Switzerland and is currently a professor of Comparative and developmental criminology at Cambridge. However, his comments are revealing;

"The sample is large enough to draw valid conclusions about adolescents in the capital of Jordan, Amman," Professor Manuel Eisner, the main supervisor of the study, told the BBC.

"We would expect that in the more rural and traditional parts of Jordan, support for honour killings would be even higher," said Professor Eisner.

Those two comments suggest to me, that the study methodology is flawed because it does not take into account the makeup of the Jordanian population and considers the entire population as homogeneous. Amman is about 75% Palestinian arab. Yes, it does reflect Jordan as it exists. However, unless there is a manner in which to differentiate the contributing factors on the measured perceptions, then the study is somewhat useless. It just says there is a problem.

This study will most likely be criticized by other researchers who will point out the flaw. I am not saying the study is wrong or that the data is incorrect. What I am saying is that incorrect conclusions can be drawn. For example, if we were to look at murder rates in Manchester and not to take into account age, income and cultural characteristics the data would be somewhat useless. By the same token, the Jordanian study des not take into account the presence of a culture that is very different than pure Jordanian culture. More specifically, if the views on honour killings are reflective of the Hizbollah, Hamas mentality rather than the very different Jordanian culture is it fair to describe it as Jordanian? I don't think it is fair to the Jordanians that's all.

So it is your own conclusion you just draw out of your hat?

What are "Palestinian arabs" in comparison to "normal" Jordanians? Are that 75% those who are opposed honor killings or are that 75% that third of young man and one fifth who think honor killings are acceptable.

What has Hezbollah and Hamas to do with it? are that ethnic or cultural entities?

The study looked at the social status, education and economic status as background factors.

and it is btw. not a study of murderers but just on who would say such honor killing is justified.

The 10-15 honor killing per year itself we are talking about here most likely happen in the tribal Bedouin communities.

Bedouin Jordanians or Jordanians of Bedouin descent are around 35-40% of the total population of Jordan.

I never heard that they are much into Hizbollah. But couldn't it be that those 35-40% are reflected in that one third of young males who believe honor killings are justified?

My point is that there are two very distinct cultures and interpretations of Islam in Jordan. The Jordanian arabs have a different tradition than Palestinian arabs. Hamas is a doctrinaire group and governs in Gaza. It has a presence in the Palestinian community of Jordan. If you recall, Hamas is the group that burnt down the UN sports facilities in Gaza because it allowed the intermingling of boys and girls. Contrast this to Jordan where there is an effort to promote integration. King Abdallah has personally supported improved protection for women and has spoken on their behalf. His wife, who has some Palestinian heritage has also worked on this issue. It is hoped that her Palestinian background will help the campaign. However, the fact remains, that the issue of women's rights is one that is promoted by the Jordanian arabs, while the more doctrinaire Palestinian arabs resist such initiatives. The King went as far as to insist that 6 seats in the House be reserved for women. My point continues to be that one cannot treat Jordan as a homogeneous population anymore than one can treat the populations of the USA and UK as homogeneous.