Is this evil girl really Japanese?

[japan100uk]

Hi,

I found a sickening crush video i wondered whether the makers were of Japanese or Chinese origin. I have censored it so no cruelty is shown.

The girl in the video speaks some Japanese ( 'ja ne' at the end)...but i don't know if her accent is correct? Maybe you do?

Had it not been for that i would have assumed she was Chinese (they have had a spate of these disturbing movies).

Any clues with the outlay of the room?

The video is under Youtube. My username is: findcrushgirl
Maybe someone with more posts can add a link (i can't add url's as a new member)

If this is indeed japanese...is animal crush illegal in Japan? Any help is appreciated.

 

[Putrefaction]

Here is the user channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/findcrushgirl

The video:


Well, the "crush video" implies that this is her crushing the rabbit? I'd assume animal crush is illegal in mostly all countries, it's animal cruelty. I can't identify Asian races so I'm not going to try, I am going to say that I've seen a Japanese one where a cat is crushed (or on fire? blended? I forget, it was graphic with blood).

they have had a spate of these disturbing movies

Eh...what makes you say this.

 

[japan100uk]

Eh...what makes you say this.

There were a number of videos made by crushworld.net (now closed) which were based in China.
I contacted an animal welfare charity in China and soon the pics were all over Chinese forums and blogs. They tracked down the location where a movie was shot and a newspaper reporter eventually tracked down the people involved.

China was an obvious place to make such videos as they have no animal cruelty laws. The negative publicity made these people stop...but they may have been prosecuted under another Chinese law for offending public decency. The story was quite big....do a google search for it.

I will assume this woman is Japanese until someone suggests otherwise, and there are enough animal lovers in Japan to give this story ssome strong publicity.
If there aren't laws banning this cruelty in Japan....the negative reaction from the public will give the producers a hard time.

Thanks for your help.

 

[Glenski]

IMO, she is not Japanese. The little Japanese she uses (ja ne) is too stilted and forced.

 

[japan100uk]

IMO, she is not Japanese. The little Japanese she uses (ja ne) is too stilted and forced.

She's certainly playing a japanese role. I can't make out what she says near the beginning at 0.18 secs.
It's either something about being 'nipped' in English....or something in Japanese/Chinese.

 

[FrustratedDave]

She's certainly playing a japanese role. I can't make out what she says near the beginning at 0.18 secs.
It's either something about being 'nipped' in English....or something in Japanese/Chinese.

How often do you ses a Japanese person wears shoes inside? She is not Japanese like Glenski said.

 

[Ashikaga]

To the OP,

Why do you want to find out the woman's nationality? I'm a bit confused...

Seeing that your ID on YouTube is "findcrushgirl", is this whole "scene" a particular interest of yours? Or do you find this woman very attractive and want to find out more about her? Or, are you on a crusade against these videos and trying to expose the producer/s of this clip of the potentially illegal activities they promote?

 

[JimmySeal]

How often do you ses a Japanese person wears shoes inside? She is not Japanese like Glenski said.

Plenty often, aside from domiciles, schools, temples and industrial facilities. It's my understanding that Chinese people wear shoes indoors equally as rarely.
Too little audio for me to make any guess about her nationality.

 

[Putrefaction]

I don't think this is a casual video, so normal shoes and etc don't apply.

 

[Half-n-Half]

How old is that video and when did you find it? Here is a link saying they figured out who she was, etc. It's from 2006.

http://opium.poppies.org/index.php?showtopic=11954

I think this is what you are looking for in terms of Japanese animal cruelty laws:

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/2/2/2/7/p22274_index.html

If her name is Wang Jeu she is probably Chinese. In fact that article confirms she is. Your video makes it seem you are pretty hell bent on finding her; why? What she did was cruel, disgusting, and wrong, but you should understand she doesn't deserve the same cruelty she showed the rabbit. I understand you might have strong feelings (as evident in your video) but don't be against animal cruelty and at the same time show hypocrisy in advocating human cruelty, in whatever form that may be. You really have no right to, as you put it, "make her life hell." Just my two cents anyways.

Edit: Seems that's not the same woman as in the article, my mistake.

 

[butakun]

Anyhow, as Glenski points out, that Ja-ne at the end is a dead giveaway that she is not a native speaker of Japanese.

 

[Kinsao]

Ah, that's terrible! I didn't see the full (uncensored) video, but that cute rabbit just made my heart melt! (And I'm not given to getting all soppy over animals )

 

[MadamePapillon]

Wow, I'm glad they caught her. I had been wondering about it since my brother told me about the vid. He saw the uncensored version and even though he's pretty desensitized to most things on the internet I guess it really shook him up.

I can't say I agree with this:

What she did was cruel, disgusting, and wrong, but you should understand she doesn't deserve the same cruelty she showed the rabbit. I understand you might have strong feelings (as evident in your video) but don't be against animal cruelty and at the same time show hypocrisy in advocating human cruelty, in whatever form that may be. You really have no right to, as you put it, "make her life hell."

People need to be held accountable for their actions. If you're going to take a life, even the life of a kitten or a bunny, in a brutal and inhumane way then you had better be prepared to face the consequences. She walked into it with her eyes wide open and she and everyone involved, frankly, deserve everything they get. You can't do something like that without consequence.

 

[caster51]

Plenty often, aside from domiciles, schools, temples and industrial facilities. It's my understanding that Chinese people wear shoes indoors equally as rarely

there is no such glass and surface of a wall in Japanese facilities any more..

 

[Half-n-Half]

People need to be held accountable for their actions. If you're going to take a life, even the life of a kitten or a bunny, in a brutal and inhumane way then you had better be prepared to face the consequences. She walked into it with her eyes wide open and she and everyone involved, frankly, deserve everything they get. You can't do something like that without consequence.

I never said she shouldn't face any consequences. Yes, she should be punished, but within the limits of the law.

 

[bakaKanadajin]

I didn't watch the video because I figured out what was going on and didn't want to see the rabbit die. From reading this thread it seems as though some Chinese people posing as Japanese people or whatever, that's kinda beside the point, made some animal cruelty videos for shock value or god knows why.

Someone in Toronto did the same thing a decade ago, skinned some cats on video for the hell of it. I think they caught the guy and he was let off with a slap on the wrist.

I'm an animal lover. My measly 2 cents: I wouldn't have a personal problem (read: I could sleep at night) after handling her the same way she handled that rabbit. Same goes for the guy who skinned the cats alive. Inflicting harm on an innocent creature that can't make sense of its own suffering is one of the most heinous things in the world.

That ***** would know precisely why she was being trampled under my big, heavy boots and understand why I was doing it.

 

[MyNoteToSelf]

I was gonna say that she appeared Chinese to me, but it seems we have that under control.

That is really disgusting. Why anyone would take pleasure in watching or doing that is a complete mystery to me.

 

[Putrefaction]

Inflicting harm on an innocent creature that can't make sense of its own suffering is one of the most heinous things in the world.

Agreed, and on par is destroying it's habitat solely for human "advancement".

 

[Half-n-Half]

I'm an animal lover. My measly 2 cents: I wouldn't have a personal problem (read: I could sleep at night) after handling her the same way she handled that rabbit. Same goes for the guy who skinned the cats alive. Inflicting harm on an innocent creature that can't make sense of its own suffering is one of the most heinous things in the world.
That ***** would know precisely why she was being trampled under my big, heavy boots and understand why I was doing it.

You have a right to be angry and feel the way you do, but you don't have a right to commit the same cruelty on that person. I think you would personally have a very big problem with torturing another human, even if they tortured an "innocent" animal. Why? Because you are also human and you have shown you can empathize. Hypocrisy only makes you go around in circles; don't let your emotions get the best of you.

 

[Haruspex]

You have a right to be angry and feel the way you do, but you don't have a right to commit the same cruelty on that person. I think you would personally have a very big problem with torturing another human, even if they tortured an "innocent" animal. Why? Because you are also human and you have shown you can empathize. Hypocrisy only makes you go around in circles; don't let your emotions get the best of you.

Hypocrisy? I feel the same way as bakaKanadajin in respect of crushing the culprit, but I don't think its hypocrisy. Its not justice, its just an instinct. Personal satisfaction disguised as a strong sense of morality.

 

[Half-n-Half]

Hypocrisy? I feel the same way as bakaKanadajin in respect of crushing the culprit, but I don't think its hypocrisy. Its not justice, its just an instinct. Personal satisfaction disguised as a strong sense of morality.

An eye for an eye is hypocritical. Poking out someone's eye is wrong, so if they do it we poke out their eye. If you think it is wrong and disgusting to torture an animal, which we all are, to death and yet find it right and/or satisfying to return the favor, that is hypocrisy.

 

[Haruspex]

An eye for an eye is hypocritical. Poking out someone's eye is wrong, so if they do it we poke out their eye. If you think it is wrong and disgusting to torture an animal, which we all are, to death and yet find it right and/or satisfying to return the favor, that is hypocrisy.

It is only hypocrisy if you believe you are doing the right thing, taking the appropriate steps. If I torture the culprit, fully aware of the fact that I'm merely doing it to satisfy my urges, created by my own instincts, why would you call that hypocrisy? I admit to being in the wrong, in the eyes of society.

 

[Half-n-Half]

It is only hypocrisy if you believe you are doing the right thing, taking the appropriate steps. If I torture the culprit, fully aware of the fact that I'm merely doing it to satisfy my urges, created by my own instincts, why would you call that hypocrisy? I admit to being in the wrong, in the eyes of society.

No, I'm sorry but I have to flat out disagree here. You don't have to believe what you do is right to be hypocritical, you just have to go against a belief or idea you hold to be true. For example, animal cruelty and torture is wrong yet you turn around and commit torture. Whether the person in question is actually a hypocrite or not is irrelevant, however. The point I'm trying to make and stand by is that you do not have a right to torture someone with the same amount of cruelty that they showed to an animal. It's inhumane and you should not do it.

 

[Haruspex]

No, I'm sorry but I have to flat out disagree here. You don't have to believe what you do is right to be hypocritical, you just have to go against a belief or idea you hold to be true. For example, animal cruelty and torture is wrong yet you turn around and commit torture. Whether the person in question is actually a hypocrite or not is irrelevant, however. The point I'm trying to make and stand by is that you do not have a right to torture someone with the same amount of cruelty that they showed to an animal. It's inhumane and you should not do it.

I don't believe in right and wrong. I believe in behaviourism, so no, I am not a hypocrite. I hate animal cruelty instinctively, not because I believe that it is wrong.


Who put that limitation on our rights if I may ask? Who the hell gave us rights to begin with? Rights can get to **** to be absolutely honest.

I hate the word 'should' (and its equivalents), it reeks of normative ethics.

 

[bakaKanadajin]

You have a right to be angry and feel the way you do, but you don't have a right to commit the same cruelty on that person. I think you would personally have a very big problem with torturing another human, even if they tortured an "innocent" animal. Why? Because you are also human and you have shown you can empathize. Hypocrisy only makes you go around in circles; don't let your emotions get the best of you.

I never said I had a right to do anything, I was commenting on what I'd be okay with doing myself, personally. Just a comment more so intended to display my visceral hatred for those who inflict harm on animals than to say what's proper.

And no, I personally wouldn't have a problem inflicting harm on someone who violently killed or tortured an animal, trust me. Does that make me a candidate for the next 'Hey you're a nice guy' award? No, but, I don't want the damn award.

If the person apologized and really saw the wrong of their ways I wouldn't do it though, I'm reasonable. If the person realized what they had done and genuinely felt the weight of their actions, that would be sufficient for me. But the truth is most people see animals as lower than humans, less deserving, inferior, part of the background, etc. It's part of the reason this planet is going down the shllter.

I don't believe there is any hypocrisy in what I've said, I'm talking about inflicting harm on the guilty to protect/avenge the innocent. There's a different principle (if you can call it that) at work. You're saying that the hypocrisy stems from demanding compassion without showing it but I'm not demanding it and taking it away from the same two parties. One is clearly innocent, one is guilty.

If I said I was against violence period, then inflicted harm on someone who had tortured an animal, THEN I'd be a hypocrite.