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.

' Femicide is a thing because in the vast majority of cases it is women being murdered by their partner/ex-partner, not men. And this is the case because this thing called sexism exists, where one sex is being opressed by the other thanks to a complex and historically robust system of values (beliefs/accepted behaviors). That doesn't exclude nor is it contradicted by the fact that there may be cases where women kill men! Does this help at all?'

​

If ' a complex and historically robust system of values (beliefs/accepted behaviors' caused women to be hurt more , then that means that it would be logical for us to not see that through the entirety of human history , but we do, because you ARE WRONG .Stop with this nonsense. Enough is enough , please. In any physical conflict between a man and a woman , a woman is more likely to die because of physical factors. It was always like this and it will always be like this. It's a biological reality that has created this problem. Sexism has nothing to do with it. Unless you want to categorize the entirety of the human and animal experience as sexist. Through the entirety of human history women could and would be victimised unless protected by a man , or a group of men. A town is sacked and the men are dead then the women are raped and enslaved. A lion kills a rival and takes the females as his and then they either accept it or are killed too. Are lions sexist ? Try and be logical with your arguments or as demonstrated they will be easy to expose as inaccurate.