Understanding Nakai-kun’s Response to Sexual Violence Allegations and the Concept of Secondary Harm
Question from a reader:
Despite reaching a settlement, there have been reports of sexual violence involving someone resembling Watanabe Nagisa, leading to Nakai-kun’s retirement and a loss of sponsors for Fuji TV. Even though subcontractors are also suffering secondary damage, why is it that Nakai-kun can only respond, while that person’s lawyer claims “secondary harm”?