The Kitten Killer of Hangzhou

Status: Real (unfortunately)
A series of pictures showing a woman crushing a kitten to death with her stiletto heels is causing an uproar over in China. The pictures first appeared on the internet and have recently been published by some Chinese newspapers. The woman in the photos has been dubbed the Kitten Killer of Hangzhou, because the background scene has been identified as Hangzhou. I've been able to locate four of the pictures in the series, but I think there are a few more (far more graphic) ones. Here are the ones I found (I don't have larger versions):

image image
Image 3
(possibly disturbing)
Image 4
(possibly disturbing)

The big question is: Who is this woman? One theory is that the images come from a Japanese shoe advertisement. Another theory identifies the kitten killer as a "37-year-old woman from Hubei province with the internet identity 'Gainmas.'" The London Telegraph elaborates:

She had registered a website in Hangzhou and - the ultimate evidence - had bought a pair of stilettoes on eBay last year. She was also registered with QQ, a popular Chinese message service, where she wrote of herself: "I furiously crush everything to do with you and me." Before her QQ address went dead, its owner had several conversations. In one, she is coy, saying "So what?" when asked if the pictures are of her, and then, when asked again, replying: "In theory." When confronted by a reporter, she became defensive, saying: "Suddenly hundreds of people are on my QQ and cursing me. What's the problem if I crush cats? It's a type of experience. You wouldn't understand."

The Telegraph goes on to note:

No one seems to have suggested the serious possibility that the photographs could be a hoax - created by picture-altering computer software. But in the face of tight control of self-expression, young Chinese are seeking wildly different forms of sensation or satire on the state of society.

Without having seen all the pictures (and better quality ones), it's hard to judge whether or not they're real. But it certainly seems like this has already become the Chinese version of Bonsai Kitten (with the added twist that it may be real... in which case it's definitely disgusting).

Update: A "Crush" video is circulating around (you can find links to it in the comments, if you're interested) that makes it pretty clear the woman really did step on a kitten. Also, an article in the Shanghai Daily reports that the lady, and the guy who produced the video, have been identified. The producer, who is a camera operator at a TV station, has apologized. However, the woman, who works as a nurse at a hospital, has disappeared, leading to concerns that kitten commandoes may have abducted her (or something along those lines).

Animals Gross Photos

Posted on Mon Mar 06, 2006



Comments

it BETTER not be real or i'll go over and crush HER to death that B*TCH
Posted by Yushi  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  01:32 AM
There was a movie going around at http://www.warfalcons.com/cgi-bin/download.pl?file=0246, but it has been removed.
Posted by Unfairly Balanced  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  01:34 AM
news.tom.com/2006-03-03/0027/15263018.html

In the third one, look carefully at the cat's stripes. It's not even a good photoshop.

If this riled you up, go wash the red "sucker" off your forehead.
Posted by raoulduke  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  02:16 AM
You can do far worse than that, i'll send up some images of one of my mates crushing a kitten with one of his Demonia boots 4 inch heel.

Lol Randomninja
Posted by kiTY KilLeR  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  03:00 AM
Wait... Bonzai Kitten is a hoax?!

Does that mean I should let mine out of the jar now, or what?
Posted by David B.  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  03:09 AM
raoulduke, that is most likely an artifact of digital image compression. There is no evidence the cat was alive, and there is no blood, also the eye looks fake, but that doesnt mean it is photoshopped. I would put this down to a prop being used to make disturbing images. Or a disturbed woman actually doing something this horrible.

The word photoshopped is throw around as if it is an all powerful tool (and as if you only use photoshop). Even the best digital image maniputation software and the best artist would have huge difficulty with things like this, and the end result wouldnt look anywhere near real in most of the images presented.

The fact is, these images have some basis in truth. Photos would have to have been taken of a woman and a cat in these positions and of the woman holding said cat, if you were planning on faking such images.

So we know that the woman at some point somewhere held the cat, so what about this incident indicates it would be faked by image manipulation? Not much. There would simply be no point in spending hours and hours editing a set of images of this woman and this cat, when she could have just done (and probably did) the disgusting thing depicted, although probably to an already dead cat/prop. At least i hope.
Posted by JP  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:25 AM
hoax or not, tasteless, very tasteless.

and "kittykiller" why don't you deliver those pics of your "mate" to me in person and I will show you what it's like to have your head crushed under a boot.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:38 AM
Go Chuck!
Posted by Nettie  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:43 AM
A link to the movie:

Warning, disturbing video!

http://www.flurl.com/uploaded/Djurplgare_85850.html

Posted by Oscar  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:05 AM
OMFG !!!! that's inhuman, evenif it's a fake video.. i've just seen first 10 seconds and i can see more :(
Posted by mattt  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:24 AM
Sick, Alex! Very sick! Real or not, you could have posted a link for these pictures. Not all of your site visitors come here to be grossed out like this! Spare us next time, the gore!
Posted by Christopher in Joplin, Missouri  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:25 AM
aww.....that is DISGUSTING! i agree with Yushi!!
Posted by cat  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:55 AM
15 million US children live in poverty and people are worried about one cat half way round the world?!

Something's sick here, but it isn't the video!
Posted by HeartsAndMinds.Org  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  06:09 AM
HeartsAndMinds...yes, you are right, it is quite ok to kill cats since children live in poverty.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  06:11 AM
"you are right, it is quite ok to kill cats since children live in poverty"

Says Mr. "it is quite ok to kill people because they kill cats"! Hypocrit!
Posted by HeartsAndMinds.Org  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  06:20 AM
sigh, I guess my sarcasm didn't quite make through your tiny little brain.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  06:43 AM
Perhaps you should have worn stilletos.

People matter more than animals. Everytime you forget that, God kills a kitten; and this is how!
Posted by HeartsAndMinds.Org  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  07:05 AM
umm, people are animals. I will say no more on the subject as you are obviously whacked.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  07:15 AM
I knew someone would dig up the video...we're great at digging stuff up...
Posted by davetolomy  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  08:24 AM
Oh and those awful noises that cat makes in the video :( it makes me want to cry...
Posted by davetolomy  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  08:28 AM
Please take the Snopes route and warn of graphic images before displaying them. Posting those like that was just cruel.
Posted by Doug Nelson  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  08:29 AM
"people are animals"

So why are you so upset when somebody behaves like one?! Its because its easier to be outraged about somthing you can't do anything about than to get worked up about something you can! It's not like you actually want to do anything, not when pretending you would makes you feel just as morally supereor.

Hey honey, screw the couch-potato moralizors; squash one for me!
Posted by HeartsAndMinds.Org  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  09:07 AM
http://www.ogrish.com/archives/new_chinese_crush_videos_causing_outrage_Mar_06_2006.html
Posted by Unfairly Balanced  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  09:08 AM
Ow and btw she hates rabbits too:
http://msn.ynet.com/view.jsp?oid=7901465
Posted by Unfairly Balanced  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  09:12 AM
Okay, I replaced the two most disturbing images with links.
Posted by The Curator  in  San Diego  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  09:24 AM
Thank you
Posted by Doug Nelson  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  09:35 AM
Damn, Oscar. Thanks for clearing it up, at least. That is one sick woman.
Posted by raoulduke  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  10:06 AM
Uh, HeartsandMinds, I don't know if you noticed or not, but the reason people are discussing animal abuse is because the story is about a kitten being crushed.

Now, if she had crushed a poverty stricken child with her heel, I'm sure people would be saying "Poor starving kid!"

Go pimp your site elsewhere.
Posted by Banana  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  11:22 AM
Wow. Some people deserve to die. I hope this woman gets mauled by a tiger or something. It would serve her right.
Posted by Sakano  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  11:38 AM
It's bad enough that someone would do a thing like that but 2 or more people making a video of it and posting it on the internet just leaves me speechless.

That video ranks right up there with footage of Nazis shooting people on the edge of an open pit.
Posted by Blondin  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  11:42 AM
Odd to draw a moral equivalence between killing a cat and killing human beings. I try not to kill anything unnecessarily -- even ants on a sidewalk -- but I wouldn't think to equate, say, the poultry industry with the Holocaust, or a mouse-trap with a man-trap. Or crushing a kitten with mass murder of innocents at the side of a pit. They are just different.
Posted by Sam  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  02:38 PM
Hearts & Minds, I know I said I would speak no further on this subject but I had to post a link for you.
A pet is a beloved part of your family, and as a Christian, you should do everything you can to guarantee that this valued member of your family receives the glorious eternal reward for which Christ gave His very life.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  02:41 PM
Well, Chuck, that's intelligent. But at least those parodied in this article in The Onion won't burn down businesses and embassies and threaten lives world-wide. So inadvertently you've provided us another lesson in the falsity of moral equivalence: rational people know that cartoons and satire do not warrant riot and destruction, and that the sick killing of a cat does not warrant death for the sicko. People who can't make these - er, simple - distinctions, are a threat to us all.
Posted by Sam  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  03:14 PM
that is just awful, anything that lives have feelings too you know. The pain that kitten had to go through just sickens me
Posted by asdfgh  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  03:34 PM
I am so allergic to dead animals, it's not even funny. I'm not going to watch or view anything.

I do have to say, I like the Ads by Google on this page.
Posted by Maegan  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  03:34 PM
um Sam, who is warranting burning down businesses, embassies or threatening lives worldwide? Sorry if I missed your point, perhaps you could reiterate it.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:23 PM
Chuck, Sam is pointing out that the satire on Christians you posted (you did know it was satire, right?) is unlikely to illicit the same extreme response as the recent publication in Europe of cartoons mocking Islam.

Interestingly, the Bible says that God gave man dominion over all other beasts, and there's plenty in the OT about wringing their heads off and scattering their blood around to keep the average fur-fondler in apoplexy for months; it's the Koran that says that the other animals are people too.

This is a sick person doing a sick thing, but the backlash is disproportionate. Those people saying they could happily do the same to her, or kill her for it, or wishing her a similarly unpleasant death aren't any better.
Posted by David B.  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:47 PM
I don't see why people can't say they would kill her. It's not like anyone is going to go out to China and actually kill her...it's just a way of expressing anger.

I'm sure at one point or another, everyone has wished someone dead.
Posted by Sakano  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:53 PM
There once was a fellow named Chuck
With the seeming IQ of a cluck
Who perhaps played a game
With the object to flame
But was all logical thought sure to duck

Sorry, Chuck. Be more subtle in the next thread.
Posted by Sam  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:55 PM
I forget, didn't Starship Troopers have a scene where a group of kids stamped on a load of real cockroaches?
Posted by David B.  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:56 PM
I hate the proverb of an eye for an eye, but I don't think it's wrong to wish her an unpleasant death, provided it doesn't go beyond wishing.

On another note, violent cruelty isn't endemic just to humans. I remember hearing about a bored elephant who would leave trails of bread crumbs around and then try to smash the birds that ate them (so her keepers taught her to paint). Also, in young animals, seemingly pointless kills may be made for the animal to learn how to hunt, or simply for entainment. I know my cat shows no mercy to smaller animals.
Posted by Citizen Premier  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  04:58 PM
There once was a fellow named Chuck
With the seeming IQ of a cluck
Who perhaps played a game
With the object to flame
But was all logical thought sure to duck


wow, thats just pure poetry Sam...I will extend you a courtesy you have not extended me and will refrain from posting any ignorant comments about you. Although maybe you should take your own advice about being subtle.

And David, I understand what you are saying however, I never said anything about wishing the lady harm so I was not really sure why that comment was directed at me.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:04 PM
There once was a fellow named Chuck,
Who said, with the voice of a duck,
"I sure am-a spittin'
'Bout thet girl and her kitten,
But the rest of it, I don't give a f***!"

Now Sam was a poster quite rare,
And really he did seem to care
That people shouldn't fret
O'er some bint and her pet
While he wasn't getting his share!

But David's the lone voice of reason,
and truly a man for all season(s).
With a wit so sublime,
he's ne'er stuck for a rhyme.
Even though you all know he's just teasin'!
Posted by David B.  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:06 PM
>>I never said anything about wishing the lady harm so I was not really sure why that comment was directed at me.

What, mine or Sam's. In either case, I'd say that the comment was a response to your posts in the spirit of open discussion, this being a forum an' all. So, when you said "I will show you what it's like to have your head crushed under a boot." you were in fact volunteering to lie down and have someone stamp on your head for the purposes of demonstration. Wow, that's dedication!
Posted by David B.  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:15 PM
>>I don't think it's wrong to wish her an unpleasant death, provided it doesn't go beyond wishing.

So would it be wrong to feel enjoyment, vindication, 'justice had been done', or whatever if something unfortunate did happen to her?

Wouldn't that just be 'a wish come true'? Nothing to be ashamed of there, right?
Posted by David B.  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:28 PM
I can't say I would shed any tears if she was really mauled by a tiger, and I'm not ashamed to admit it.
Posted by Sakano  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:30 PM
[emBut David's the lone voice of reason,
and truly a man for all season(s).
With a wit so sublime,
he's ne'er stuck for a rhyme.
Even though you all know he's just teasin'!

ok, that was pretty good.

So, when you said "I will show you what it's like to have your head crushed under a boot." you were in fact volunteering to lie down and have someone stamp on your head for the purposes of demonstration. Wow, that's dedication!

damn you and your pedantry David! *shakes fist at David* and yes, I am being sarcastic.
Posted by Chuck  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:34 PM
i have to agree with you Chuck, that is tasteless not to mention cruel.

real or not, its still disturbing
Posted by Eva  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:36 PM
>>I can't say I would shed any tears if she was really mauled by a tiger, and I'm not ashamed to admit it.

I doubt I'd shed any if you were, but not because of any personal antipathy.

I just have trouble with who's company "he/she/they got what was coming to them" puts you in with. It's what's behind those crowds you see celebrating the latest terrorist attrocity, and the lynch mobs, and fatwas.
Posted by David B.  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:44 PM
I doubt I'd shed any if you were, but not because of any personal antipathy.

I just have trouble with who's company "he/she/they got what was coming to them" puts you in with. It's what's behind those crowds you see celebrating the latest terrorist attrocity, and the lynch mobs, and fatwas.


Hm, sounds kind of hypocritcal to me.

Oh well. That's what you get when someone tries to lecture you on the internet. Save your moral superiority for someone who cares.
Posted by Sakano  on  Tue Mar 07, 2006  at  05:49 PM
Comments: Page 1 of 5 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.