Honor-related violence and oppression (HRVO) became a public and state concern in Sweden in the late 1990´s. The murders of three young girls in the name of “honor” sparked a vigorous scholarly and public debate on the causes of honor-related violence (HRV). Two main conflicting explanations emerged, and the phenomenon was constructed to have either cultural roots or seen as a form of patriarchal violence against women. Since then the debate has continued to raise much polemic in the Swedish society. The aim of this study was to gain deeper understanding of how social workers perceive and manage the conflicting discourses on HRVO in Sweden. The study is based on qualitative interviews with 12 key agents working with HRVO. The in-depth interviews were thematically analyzed. The inductive approach used resulted in nuanced findings that show that a cultural reductionism narrative is perceived as dominant regarding how HRVO is explained and tackled. This and the lack of consensus between conflicting perspectives on how HRVO should be explained has greatly affected the social practice with people that experience HRVO. The findings of this study also indicate that a more inclusive and nuanced framework needs to be utilized to address HRVO.