In violence and oppression in the name of honor, both women and men can be victims and perpetrators in different ways in this practice. In many countries, honorary standards are accepted. This means that family, relatives and family friends have the right to control, punish and in some cases murder girls and women if they are deemed to have "brought shame on the family". This thesis aims to explore these cultural practices and the role and actions of women regarding violence and oppression in the name of honor, based on the interviews with professionals combined with research related to the custom. The structure in this thesis is based on the following questions: What is violence and oppression in the name of honor? And what role does women play in this cultural custom? To achieve answers to these questions a qualitative research-method was applied to the study. The qualitative study comprises interviews with 4 strategically selected participants with in-depth knowledge of violence and oppression in the name of honor in their professional capacity.  The interview material in this thesis, which is also structured by themes, has been analyzed through a gender theoretic framework.  In conclusion, the study shows that violence and oppression in the name of honor can be practiced everywhere and shows how women play an active part in the custom by participating, nourishing and enforcing the control of family members and possibly punish anyone who violates the honorary norm.

Authors: Ellen Gunnarsson & Emma Lindström Title: Honour as argument- A qualitative study of approaches and attitudes towards the concept of “honour” in verdicts regarding Section 2 of the LVU.  [Translated title] Supervisor: Barzoo Eliassi Assessor: Anette Lundin   The aim of this study was to extend comprehension of which approaches and attitudes towards violence and oppression in the name of “honour” may be of significance in the social services investigations and judgments relating to section 2 of the LVU. The empirical material are based on ten verdicts, some including girls who were exposed to “honour related violence” and others including girls who were not exposed. To analyze the verdicts in this study, we examined the arguments authorities used for the decision on LVU through a text-analysis. The main conclusion of the study were that the social welfare authorities combined the concept of “honour” with culture and that “honour” was seen as something dangerous for the girls. This cultural interpretation creates an Orientalist view and divides people into "us” and “them" which can lead to discrimination and racism of certain cultural groups.