The Glamorous Kitten Killer of Hangzhou
“China’s media have launched a nationwide hunt for a glamorously dressed woman who has been photographed apparently crushing a kitten to death with her stiletto heels. Gruesome pictures, which first appeared on a website, have been reproduced in recent days in many newspapers. In the first picture, the woman, wearing a cocktail dress with a leopard-print top and black skirt, caresses a tortoiseshell kitten lovingly. Then she puts it on the ground, looks at it — and lowers a stiletto heel on to its head. The subsequent images are graphic and deeply disturbing… Some newspapers then came up with a new twist — linking the pictures to an international community of animal sadists and fetishists… But attention returned to China when an internet surfer came across a 37-year-old woman from Hubei province with the internet identity ‘Gainmas’. 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…’ 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.’” — Daily Telegraph (UK)
(Thanks for the link to Mr. Zombie, who commented: “I’m pretty understanding when it comes to fetishes, but killing baby animals is apparently where I draw the line.”)
Here is a wanted poster of the Glamorous Kitten Killer. Here are three pictures of her doing her thing: 1, 2, 3. If you’re thinking to yourself, “I don’t see any blood. These are fakes,” then it would do well to remember that these are just the pictures published in the Chinese newspapers. It only takes a few minutes on Google to find your fill of squish videos. PervScan refrains from pointing you to any of the sites it found while researching this story — you can find them yourself, if you really want to — but just to convince you that squish videos are for real, here’s a small taste. WARNING: these two photos are extremely graphic. View at your own discretion. Here is a picture showing the eyeball of a rabbit hanging out after the rabbit has been crushed by a stiletto heel. And here is a snap from an odd series showing two young-looking girls squishing a big frog.
You probably noticed that the latter picture is attributed to crushworld.net, one of the more prominent sites to cater to squish fetishists. As a result of the Glamorous Kitten Killer, the site has been taken offline, but you can see a cache of it at archive.org. Also suppressed was a chat site called cfclub.net, where you could find squish fetishists swapping pictures, videos, and messages like: “Oewie…. Bea right? Hope she doesn’t s-hit on it like that last one you send me (thnx for that btw, still a awesome clip… till the moment she pies and s-hits on the animal )” and “Wander what the limits are of Bea, don’t think she has any… Still waiting till some crushbabe decides to really torture the animal, with knifes and… with fire like here…” Evidently Bea must be a popular squisher.
Squish videos appear to be a relatively new genre of pornography. It is difficult to say exactly how long they’ve been around, but the media noticed them in the wake of a notorious case in Long Island in 1998. Like bestiality in general, squish videos raise a lot of difficult questions about the standards and double standards involved in defining animal cruelty. When sending the link, Mr. Zombie mentioned the obvious comparison to Chinese food markets, where there is apparently the practice to break animals’ legs to keep them live but limited in mobility. Certainly there are a lot of examples of animal cruelty — pet-abuse.com keeps a newswire of them — but squish videos may be one of the most troubling. What sort of kick does someone get from stabbing a rabbit with a high heel? It’s worth noting that these squish videos often involve not just a quick stomp but rather a slow torture. Is it really so hot to spend half an hour poking out some kitty’s eye with a stiletto? It’s tempting to say that the real bestiality here has nothing to do with beasts and everything to do with the humans squishing them.
When you first announced you ‘bestiality week’ I was interested, having, one might say, a personal interest in the subject matter. However, when I found the site today and read the above article, I was nonplussed, to say the least. What has this got to do with bestiality? Answer: nothing. You need to seriously re-think your inclusion of it here.
I was rather expecting to find the story of the Mesa AR firefighter arrested for attempting to seduce his neighbour’s sheep (story here: http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/0306mesa-official.html ). Instead I find a revolting story of some woman torturing and killing animals, with absolutely nothing to do with sexual contact.
Put this story under ‘mutilation’ or, at best, ‘uncategorized’, and return the bestiality section to posts of human/animal sexual contact.
Corin raises an excellent objection. After all, zoophilia means love of animals, etymologically. What does this have to do with the squishers who would seem only to hate animals?
The answer is that squish videos are marketed as pornography. It’s unclear whether the girls in these videos are enjoying the squishing that they do. The Glamorous Kitten Killer seems to. Other girls may just do it for money or for a random lark. However, the videos are clearly marketed to people — to men, mostly — who get some sort of erotic charge from them. And anything that utilizes animals to convey an erotic charge qualifies as bestiality.
The situation is analogous to S&M activities between humans. Do you consider S&M a sexual activity? Or just a violent one? If you can consider sadism a sexual activity, then this squishing variant of bestiality ought to be considered one as well.
However, all that being said, you can only gain in understanding by being precise with terms. By definition, a zoophile is someone who loves animals. Squishers don’t seem to fit that category. Perhaps it’s time to make a distinction? Perhaps in the future we should reserve the term zoophilia for people who, at least in their own minds, make love with animals? And we should reserve bestiality for those who torture them?
P.S. The Mesa firefighter story was going to run at the beginning of next week, but since you’ve let the cat out of the bag — so to speak — perhaps we’ll just leave it here in the comments.
I think there should be a bit of caution in the defining of terms Supervert. I would not place bestiality into the realm of those who torture animals. Actually, there is already a term for the torture, and that’s zoosadism.
Zoosadism — excellent term. Let’s all use it.
As a born and raised vegetarian, and supporter of fair treatment and the rights of animals as living organisms which are no different than any other on this planet, I am thoroughly disgusted.
If I were to ever meet this kitten-killing, venom-dripping, two-bit bitch from Hell, I would give her a dose of her own medicine. This kind of thing makes me literally shake with rage…
Zoosadism!! I like it. It fits. “The Glamorous Kitten Killer of Hangzhou” is a zoosadist for sure, who likes to get her jollies inflicting pain on defenseless little furry animals. Sick bitch that she is …probably gets some kind of sexual thrill out of watching the poor things suffer. Saddist and massochists are around us everywhere and we must be ever vigilant to them. Take for instance:
Albert Fish, the patron saint of sadomasochism, the granddaddy of the deranged who enjoyed implanting needles in his genitalia, stuffing his asshole with flaming alcohol balls, eating shit, killing children and making stews out of their remains.
“I always had a desire to inflict pain on others and to have others inflict pain on me. I always seemed to enjoy everything that hurts. The desire to inflict pain, that is all that is uppermost… What a thrill that will be if I have to die in the electric chair. It will be the supreme thrill. The only one I haven’t tried…. I am Christ! I am Christ!”
He was arrested and sentenced to die in Sing Sing (Osingsing prison) in 1936. He happily helped his executioners with the electrodes and died a happy man. Legend says the chair short-circuited at first because of the twenty needles implanted in his genitalia.
TO LuciousGoddess…you go girl!!
wow…
there are fetishes
that i like to voyeuristically peep
but wouldn’t consider fleshing out…
such as fisting my asshole…
but this animal crushing thing
is reminiscent of that stereotypical
‘lord of the flies’ heart of the babe syndrome
where skewering and squishing
is just an adolescent precursor
for things to come…
if it were pure fiction it could
be penned rather erotic…
but the reality of it is a dulling of my senses…
” Zoosadism — excellent term. Let’s all use it. ” (Supervert)
Yes, please. Let’s. When it’s applicable.
“The situation is analogous to S&M activities between humans. Do you consider S&M a sexual activity? Or just a violent one? ” (SV)
I consider it ” S&M “.
Supervert; To in any way imply that treading on small animals is a. Part of the reppotoire of acts we may list under ‘Bestiallity’, just because there’s a probability of sexuality involved, is a bit too much like saying ‘Adult, consenting Sexual intercourse is just like Pedophila ~ Because they *fuck* kids.’
It isn’t. That’s precisely why we call that Pedophilia (Necrophilia. Rape. Chinese. Black) They’re all sex / human beings. But different enough that we choose to differentiate. So; We all have sex. It doesn’t mean to say all forms of sex meld and are as one.
There’s a world of difference between ‘Bestiallity’ and, eg. Necrophillia. Necrophiles don’t pursue dead Dogs, do they? And nor do Bestiallists, by definition, wish to tread on things.
Droning on even more; Bestiallity, by definition, is Not Zoophillia. Call a Zoophile a Bestiallist and you’re looking at the short route to a punch in the mouth. It’s on par with calling a Father a Pedo.
Trying desperately to end this, before people start raking their own faces … I’d take a stab at breaking it down to this, most simplistic pair of definitions:
Bestiallist = One who will fuck an animal. (We won’t go into what else ‘he’ may do, given the shot at it)
Zoophile = One who keeps and cares for ‘his’ own animals and loves them as one may ones own children / partner. The animals are the Zoophiles ’significant other’. Sex is optional and that love is in no way conditional on it.
So, you see: A Bestialist *Could* also prove a squasher (raper, kiddy fiddler ad nauseum). But being a Beaster doesn’t necessitate or point to that). A bestiallist isn’t likely a Zoophile. A Zoophile is the last person likely to want to hurt an animal.
Sorry to have gone on so much. I saw this the other day and had to walk away. Maybe as with Corin, that stilletto went straight through a nerve ;-)
What a nasty woman. There are no laws against this in China. This is the kind of thing you can come to expect from a nation who at one time ate their children.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0CE3D71E3DF936A35751C0A961958260
“At the larger, horrific center of Mr. Becker’s account is the widespread resort among the Chinese people to that most sickening form of desperation: cannibalism, the selling of human flesh on the market, the swapping of children so people could use them for food without committing the additional sin of eating their own.”
Calls to mind “A Modest Proposal” only real.
PervScan has featured stories about child abuse that have elicited less emotion. Wow. Must be the pictures.
Anyway, the terminological precisions contributed by Husk and Treadlok are always welcome. It can be very difficult to approach a perversion like this with any sort of objectivity, and so these precisions really contribute to a certain intellectual understanding (as opposed to an emotional repudiation) of the matter. Just as a scientist would not confuse a molecule with an atom or an atom with a proton, so too should we strive for the greatest exactitude in our terms.
Here’s a question for you: Do you think zoophiles object to zoosadism even more than “normal” people do?
No Supervert, prob the reason there has been such a responce to this, is zoos don’t like to be lumped into the catigory of this kind of crap. If a zoo ever caused harm to one of his/her bretherin (animal), it would leave us with a fealing like a “normal” person intentionally hurting their best friend or wife/husband.
“Here’s a question for you: Do you think zoophiles object to zoosadism even more than “normal” people do?”
On the whole, I would say yes. Especially, if the animal in question is a member of the zoos totem, or preferred species. That is maybe one of the reasons there are so many involved in animal rescues and the like.
” Do you think zoophiles object to zoosadism even more than “normal” people do? ”
Might a Zoophile object more strongly than those of the mainstream persuasion?
Why should a Zoophile find animal squashing one bit Less vile than any other sub group than, perhaps, Sadists?
Treading on creatures is simply disgusting, abject cruelty. That surely has no place anyway in a discussion of any ’sexual practice’ beyond that of the most extreme forms of Sadism. It’s only ‘connection’ to Zoophillia is that there’s an animal in the frame.
Having said that, and to broaden the treatment a little; Zoophile is Not synonimous with vegetarian, bunny hugger or peta member. Just as ‘Gentlemen prefer blondes’, so a Zoophile may be drawn, even more or less exclusively, to say, Dogs. Or they may be Equiphiles.
A Dog orientated Zoophile (Cinnophile) may smile at every Dog in the street and look right through a passing horse. This is how come a Zoophile might, eg. Eat bacon and eggs before setting out to hunt a Deer. Then get misty eyed when his Dog jumps up to greet him home.
But, yes; A Zoophile can look at that shit ~ objectively as the next person ~ and equelly agree that Things like that, that get a rush out of doing that? Out of the pool. Just because.
Completely different observation: The three pictures from the newspaper seem to have been taken in a rather public (or at least, obviously out-of-doors) place. Does that strike anyone else as odd? It seems to me that, if you’re going to do something as gruesome as crush small animals, you’d want to do it someplace a little more private - say, the secret room hidden in the basement.
:-( Makes me wanna cry. :-(
This is, without a doubt, the sickest thing i have ever heard of/seen, and i pretty much spend my days looking up sick shit. These are people who make me wish i believed in Hell, so i atleast could have the comfort of knowing that they would get the pain they deserve for doing this.
I think this is the only fetish i have Ever been seriously shocked by. I am disgusted to the point where i feel like throwing up.
Like to back up what necro said. Extremely depressing that people like this exist. They need to experience severe pain.
i hope you will all burn in hell,sick individuals
Horrendous.
It might be worth noting that some serial killers practice on animals, with an increasing level of cruelty; before they start on people. Catch her before Kittens aren’t enough to satisfy…
As pointed out above, cruelty in markets and for food production is common and not just in China.
Its just easier to pay someone else to do it.
Same with Pedos who buy pictures/film then claim it’s harmless. They pay someone else to do it instead.
sick, disgusting people, to say the least, dang who would such acts.
I’ll impale this woman, given the chance…tell me where you are, defenseless life taker!
All comments become the property of PervScan. You must use an email address to post a comment. However, PervScan disallows email addresses in the text of comments.
Great Videos
