Quote:
Originally Posted by Obelisk ze Tormentor
I'm responding more to your bolded statement: It goes both ways. Both cases are possible. That's the point that Ugaki made to Takahashi with his story. Both the molester & the molested-succubus can be the suspect. The problem is, it's difficult to prove one way or another. The man can claim that the Succubus' aura made him do it while the Succubus can claim that the man was a molester who molested her to begin with. The difficulty to prove it is the point of the conversation, not chauvinistic remarks. Also, he's a detective, so of course he will consider all remote possibilities, especially for similar cases that already happened before even among mere humans.
|
The way Ugaki presented the scenario emphasised that the Succubus, not the molester, might be at fault, when being a Succubus increases chances further of being a victim. In fact, unless it can be proved that the man had no physical contact with the succubus before molesting her, he can't be held responsible for his actions, whatever her intent, and won't get convicted, making the whole frame-up idea implausible, if all the succubi are known to police. Though it has occurred to me that a Succubi could probably touch a man from behind, and increase the chance of him molesting another woman, yet another scenario that would've been more convincing.
I found the detective's conversation with Sakie rather chauvinistic as well, with comments like 'not liking to see a woman living on her own'. He's absolutely a crusty old war horse from a pre-feminism generation, but certainly not a bad person.