If you want to debate you need to actually read what I am saying. The lion analogy was the tip of the iceberg of my argument. You yourself said that laws are clearly not followed all the time since women are killed and just explained the phenomenon in a specific way. Just to summarise , we are discussing why women are , lots of the time , the recipients of violence , in effect the recipients of the result of breaking a law. So if you say that women are facing these issues because of a specific set of complex beliefs , values etc then I can prove you wrong just by pointing out that this is more widespread then you think and that the absence of supposedly sexist beliefs and values ( like in lions who are incapable of " believing" and " valuing") doesnt equate to the absence of females being a common recipient of violence. Look at math , disproving a proof requires only one example. Not that this is anywhere close to math , just an analogy again.

So if your palm is covering your face maybe it is because my point is eluding you , or more likely because you have no other arguments. Try to admit when you are unable to form cohesive arguments instead of corrupting my point and insulting me. The only way debates can lead to answers and to the solution of issues is if we actually debate with the long term goal of solving the issues instead of just trying to support a specific narrative and proving ourselves right. Surely in that you must agree. And if you agree then act like you agree.