I am puzzled by the reaction to this post.

I'm puzzled by your puzzlement. It's not really a word post at all, is it? Granted we have loads of non-word posts on this site - posts about food and so on - but this seems to be carrying it a bit far, speaking only for myself here.

Secondly, honour killings are a phenomenon of which I was only very vaguely aware.

Ditto. And I'd like to keep it that way. My ability to be concerned about injustice and brutality is limited to things I can do something about. The rest is just needless incredible emotional and intellectual distress. A woman's gotta know her limitations. And I don't expect to come to a word board and have graphic violence shoved in my face.

The point about the programme was the extraordinary tenacity and inner strength of the woman.

A point you failed to make in your original post. I was interested to read of her successful suit against her husband. Thank you for relating it.

I felt that anatomical details about internal examinations in the recent "squamous" thread were more information than I needed to know

At least it was word-related - this being a word board, an' all - and at least it wasn't violent.

In my experience marking a post in red and flagging that it contains strong graphic violence is an invitation to the wrong people to read the post, and for the wrong reasons.

Again, silly me: I didn't think we had "the wrong people" on this site, and I couldn't even begin to imagine what "the wrong reasons" for reading such a post might be. If you're afraid your post might be misinterpreted, perhaps you need to be more explicit in your reasons for posting it, since it's not to do with words.

"For evil to flourish it is necessary only that good men do nothing."

So what did you and your wife do about this particular evil, apart from cry about it and then post it here on the board?

If you can't see the bright side, polish the dull side.