fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2407 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2407 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 063 secrets from Secret Submission Post #344.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

1. My interpretation of Hannibal comes from the books -- in all four novels he never murdered a teenage girl. Thus I'm not going to assume he likes to do it.

2. I'm not referring to Abigail.

But he did murder women to place them with a breast exposed like the Italian painting Primavera. It's part of his breast fixation originating from his twisted psychology about his sister and sibling rivalry about being replaced at his mother's breast by his sister.

He also bit the face off the one nurse in his escape. Granted that the nurse was in his way to his freedom, this example also illustrated the primal savagery at the core of his being, that there is a part of him that does not care about his more incidental victims and who they are, only that they serve his purposes.

It's not a far stretch for him to murder teenage girls if they fell into his agenda.

So basically you're making an assumption even though the evidence contradicts it.

"The evidence" is not evidence; it is an absence of evidence in either direction. You're making an assumption yourself.

If there's no evidence that he would, why assume that it's a given just because he killed adults?

This kid is a lame fanbrat who hates when people disagree with him. Just ignore it.

I couldn't give a shit if you disagree with me as long as you actually have a valid point.

Bawww. The butthurt.

Are you on 4chan now?

"It hasn't happened so far and therefore it never can and never will"

that's all I hear you saying

Because there's nothing in canon to suggest that he *would*. It's the same reason why I don't see Harry Potter becoming a serial rapist.

Except that's an exaggerated, outlandish comparison. Harry never exhibited any behavior or personality traits that would lead to his becoming a rapist -- for example, he's never displayed sadism, misogyny, feelings of entitlement toward women, sexual aggression, etc. Hannibal Lecter, on the other hand, is a serial killer, and you're nitpicking about what types of people he might arbitrarily decide to never, ever murder? In the books, was he ever shown killing librarians? If not, are we to assume they're sacrosanct as well?

Hannibal Lecter, on the other hand, is a serial killer, and you're nitpicking about what types of people he might arbitrarily decide to never, ever murder?

Given that he didn't kill indiscriminately? That he was offended when someone hurt children (Verger)? Yes.

There's a difference between children and teenagers though. It's well within reason for him to think killing five year olds is a bad thing while also believing teenagers are old enough to be killed if he has a reason to.

If that was true, then Harris would have had him kill some.

stella, just log in, we know it's you.

[ SECRET POST #2407 ]

OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: DA

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP

Re: OP