Login

Nintendo releases a statement on Alison Rapp's termination

This comes from IGN...

“Alison Rapp was terminated due to violation of an internal company policy involving holding a second job in conflict with Nintendo’s corporate culture. Though Ms. Rapp’s termination follows her being the subject of criticism from certain groups via social media several weeks ago, the two are absolutely not related. Nintendo is a company committed to fostering inclusion and diversity in both our company and the broader video game industry and we firmly reject the harassment of individuals based on gender, race or personal beliefs. We wish Ms. Rapp well in her future endeavors.”

Categories: Media

Comments

Top Rated Comment

Going against company policy is not innovation.

panurgejr
Wed Mar 30 16 08:42pm
Rating: 2

And how many people won't believe this and then use that as proof that it is not to be believed?

Just like when Nintendo denies rumors about WiI U ending production.

right, because anti-censorship whiners are just so trusting in PR statements when Nintendo claims their localizations are faithful. let's follow that example.

So you believe in censorship? Are you from North Korea or do you only work for them?

What about when Nintendo lies about the faithfulness of the localizations?

That's like comparing apples to cheeseburgers; the comparison makes no sense.

This is internal policy; she did something she was not supposed to do which interfered with rules SHE SIGNED UP TO FOLLOW.

There's nothing dishonest about this situation, and it's not just PR spin.
She was fired for going against rules she signed up to follow.
That's it.

I was going to post in the other discussion that we will never know everything because we will never hear from Nintendo on this matter.

I still contend that we never know everything -- but Nintendo has stated that other issues were at play in this situation.

roth
Wed Mar 30 16 08:45pm
Rating: 1

If Nintendo as a company wants to innovate and change the games industry or how we view it, you might want to work on what Alison Rapp tried to do.

Going against company policy is not innovation.

It can be if policy is antiquated.

Thu Mar 31 16 07:05am
Rating: 3 (Updated 1 time)

There's nothing "antiquated" about getting fired when you don't follow the rules of a job that you yourself applied and signed for.
There is absolutely no reason to spin this into a "good guy bad guy" story.

Miss Alison broke the rules, Nintendo fired her for that.
It's a business decision, not a GamerGate fiasco that game producers need to pull BS like canceling Wii U projects over, let alone we as gamers demonizing either Miss Alison or Nintendo.

I didn't say that there's anything antiquated about following the rules. I said rules themselves can be antiquated. Reading comprehension, please.

Still doesn't make any sense, considering the rules themselves are not antiquated.

Nintendo doesn't want to be known as someone who frequently rallies against changing age of consent laws, or who supports pedophiles.

That's not antiquated.

She is clearly disclaiming that those are her opinions, not Nintendo's. It's right there on her Twitter description. So I don't see the problem, it's her opinions, deal with it.

Thu Mar 31 16 02:24pm
Rating: 1 (Updated 1 time)

It IS her problem, because it sets a bad example for who Nintendo is willing to hire.
Besides that, it was her second job that caused the firing to happen. The other stuff was inconsequential to it, though supporting lowering the AoC and defending pedophiles in and of themselves would have been reason enough on moral grounds.

Whether you "see the problem" or not is irrelevant.

yomanation
Thu Mar 31 16 02:40pm
(Updated 1 time)

You seem to believe what you are saying are facts when they are in fact your opinions. But I have no interest in arguing with you what's moral and what isn't, I prefer to discuss serious subjects with people that are not indoctrinated and uneducated.

Fri Apr 01 16 03:08pm
Rating: 1 (Updated 2 times)

Reasons why I won't take you seriously from this point forward:

#1: Arrogance, and the hypocritical belief that what you're saying isn't just an opinion as well, while simultaneously trying to project the same criticism upon others.

"You seem to believe what you are saying are facts when they are in fact your opinions."

#2 Reading between the lines, the insinuation that you, alone, know what's morally right in this situation, and the resulting insinuation that anyone disagreeing with you is morally wrong:

"But I have no interest in arguing with you what's moral and what isn't"

#3 Childish insults that, ironically, reek of projection more than honest criticism.

"I prefer to discuss serious subjects with people that are not indoctrinated and uneducated."

Sit down and stop talking.
You lost the argument the moment you resorted to such immature behavior.
We're done here.

"Empower women" like anita for some reason tries to do? Literally all she did was complain about her own life and say things that can be summed up along the lines of "men suck."

Nintendo is the LAST place anyone should tell that they need powerful women in their games.

No. No, she didn't. Don't twist her words because you don't understand them. And, for god's sake, why do all you anti-feminists feel the need to bring Anita into every conversation? You're obsessed with her.

Eh. Yes, she did, please don't talk like we don't know who Anita is or what she did to the gaming industry.

Oh come on... "what she did to the gaming industry"? She made a few videos mostly about how women are portrayed in video games that started conversations that, quite frankly, weren't happening much beforehand and needed to happen (and still do...). You make her sound like Jack Thompson.

That's because she is.

Games are just game.

Do games make you murder people?

When did Anita say that games make you murder people?

So she didn't.

If games can't make you violent then how do they make you sexist?

"Eh. Yes, she did."

Definitive proof, right there, ladies and gentlemen. I'm a man and a huge fan of Alison. She's never said she hates men, or they suck, or anything along those lines.

She said misandry doesn't exist, though. She's a radical feminist.

Racism is the systematic oppression of a racial minority. Racism against white people does not exist in the US, Canada, most of Europe, etc. because white people are not a racial minority. Misogyny is the systematic oppression of women in a patriarchal society. Misandry doesn't exist because we do not live in a matriarchal society. You can still be prejudiced against white people and men, and that's awful, but you can't be racist towards white people or misandrist. This is all politically speaking, of course. Misandry is indeed a real word that applies to the concept of hatred against men. The concept does exist, but only theoretically.

I think you're radically looking for reasons to hate her because you disagree with her opinions.

Wrong. Here's the definition.
"the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."

Don't change the definitions of words.

And you agree with her opinions? Are you fine with kids being raped?

I'm talking politically, in a United States court of law, not whatever you just pulled from Merriam-Webster or Oxford. There have been many discussions to alter the definitions of words like racism and misogyny for the last five years now. I'm not trying to twist words in my favor, I'm trying to inform you of the definition she was using, whether or not it's currently in the dictionary. It's the definition most progressives use to separate conversations about prejudice and systematic oppression.

Really sad to see you slinging mud in my direction after we started off on good terms. Alison does not promote pedophilia or child abuse. Her academic debate from five years ago would not even be on public display in the first place if she wasn't the target of a six-month-long "SJWs in Nintendo Treehouse" witch hunt.

Yes. In a court of law racism is technically legal but if a black man wasn't hiring someone because he was white he would be breaking the law because that's racist.

And you know what, if her views really did change she wouldn't have said these things: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pklg_FQ-ao

I have proof she hasn't changed. So far you haven't shown me anything.
And is it a witch hunt when you find an actual witch? She may not promote pedophilia or child abuse but she sure as hell defends them.

That's not what I was referring to. It would be illegal because it would be "discriminatory based on race", not "racist". I know I'm arguing semantics here, but we're talking legality. Racism, legally, is defined as systematic. Again, I'm explaining all of this just to tell you what she meant by "misandry isn't real". She's not saying it's impossible to hate men. So stop.

What and when is that audio even from? I've been looking for a source for a while now, and I can't find one aside from the very obviously pro-GamerGate channel you linked me to.

The witch hunt was about the "censorship" of games like Fire Emblem and Xenoblade, which she played no part in. So yes, it was unwarranted. They dug up completely unrelated personal information about her to get their way.

Wrong. Racism is not defined legally as anything other than discriminating based on race.

Racism is not illegal. Neither is sexism. Discriminating based on them are.

She actually said men deserve the hate because of how long women have been discriminated against and it wasn't misandry but their own misogyny. As if it were some sort of 'original sin' you can inherit. I haven't been sexist. Do I deserve it?

Just read the video description for the audio source. Everything is there in the link.

And actually there were some lines in Fire Emblem that she implied she wrote/suggested to the writing team meaning she at least possible played a part in that.

There is no written usage of the word "racism" in any United States legal documents I've ever read. And I never said racism/sexism was illegal.

No, I'm pretty sure she's never said men deserve hatred. Feel free to prove it, though.

No, it doesn't, actually. I found it, but no thanks to any links in the description. The podcast was from about a year after she published the paper. Nothing she says there contradicts anything she wrote in the paper. It's very defensive in nature, and not a particularly well-organized argument, but she covers the same bases she did in the paper. Nothing about advocating child abuse or rape or requesting a lower age of consent in Japan.

"There were some lines that implied she wrote/suggested to the writing team" Lmfao what? That sounds like some serious reaching. Again, you're trying to find more and more reasons to hate this woman.

Anyway, it's 2 AM. You can claim victory now if you want, but I'm so tired of this. I really don't want to talk about such a nasty subject on a website like GoNintendo. Maybe some day, five years from now, these comments will be used against me, too.

Thu Mar 31 16 07:30am
(Updated 4 times)

"Racism against white people does not exist in the US, Canada, most of Europe, etc. because white people are not a racial minority."

That's a flat-out lie.
Racism goes beyond being a minority; it's an extension of hatred for someone's skin color, regardless of whether they're the minority or not, because it's an advanced form of prejudice.
One in which unfair, often VIOLENT, treatment is acceptable simply due to being the odd one out.

There are videos out there, RIGHT NOW ON YOUTUBE, of INNOCENT WHITE PEOPLE being BEATEN SENSELESS for merely WALKING DOWN THE STREET in a neighborhood where black people are the majority.
In that situation, you can't say that they aren't a minority, so even by your narrow definition of racism, there are plenty of situations where racism applies.

Similarly, misandry DOES exist, as an advanced form of SEXISM against men.
A group of Anita's buddies, for example, attended a college function where it was suggested that men not be given the right to speak before women in a classroom, despite the fact that, as things stand now, the majority of teachers in colleges do not discriminate between genders when deciding on who they call upon during class.
There's an entire video on this; it's Misandry in action, and only someone blind to Anita's faults as a radical would ever deny that what they are proposing is WRONG, and is NOT what proper Feminism is striving to achieve.

Modern feminism has turned into an attempt by misandrists to bring men to heel, and to give women all of the benefits of chivalry and "equality" with NONE of the responsibilities or accountability that comes with being equal to their counterparts.

In their ideal world, a man saying "hi" without permission is something that they would not allow [I'm not even kidding; there is at least one feminist out there RIGHT NOW, who believes men should need CONSENT to greet a woman. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21NWphbQm18], let alone talking before women in classrooms, hitting women even in self-defense, and being given the chance to protest against false criminal accusations instead of being sent directly to jail.

It's not a "theory", it's something for which we have PLENTY OF REAL-WORLD EVIDENCE.
Misandry exists just as surely as Misogyny does, because in modern-day America, at least, there isn't a patriarchy anymore.
Men don't "rule" over women in modern-day America.[unless you're living in some sort of screwed-up area with no concept of modern societal law and equality]
Walk out onto the street and order a woman to do something, and you're going to get denied or ignored at best, slapped and beaten as you deserve to be for trying something so misogynistic at worst, unlike in the pre-modern days where not listening to a man could, in many parts of the world, get a woman KILLED.

Her opinions are inherently nonsensical; THAT'S why we're disagreeing with them.
Anita is a MISANDRIST. You can't honestly deny that without lying about all the harm she has done to the cause of ACTUAL FEMINISTS who sincerely want equality with men, rather than a lop-sided world where women get all the benefits of chivalry, with none of the accountability that men have to put up with for their actions.

Do you really want to choose this hill to die on? Misogyny isn't a thing because women are privileged, it's pretty hard to thing anything, anywhere in the world, where women don't have an advantage.

Go to this site http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/

It tells the quality of life for people in various countries, if you click on "gender difference" you can check it out for yourself.

Misogyny, the "hatred" of women, only exists theoretically, it doesn't exist in real life, nobody gets "hurt" by misogyny in a society where women are put above men in the hierarchy.

Cool, another person to block.

Well, bye.

You're blocking him because you disagree with him about the existence of something? Serious question, because I'm trying to fathom your actions here

Kids don't like think that they're wrong. lols

I blocked him because
A) The point he's making is absolutely ridiculous. He linked me to the OECD Better Life Project, which has recored that, on average, men have the advantage when it comes to employment, political position, and gross income worldwide. Not only that, but there are multiple factors to the issue that can't be recorded by purely monetary value. Like, um, basic respect. Or the fact that we both assume he's male.
B) He literally made an account this week. That was his first comment on this site. It's clear to me that he's following this issue because it's controversial, and it's not unlikely he's trying to stir up trouble. I don't think I'm going to miss much by blocking him.
C) This article is over a week old. I don't wish to discuss this anymore. Everything surrounding Alison has just made me incredibly tired and depressed, and I'm still trying to recover. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. I didn't even think people would still be browsing this comment section over a week later, but, well… here we are. I'm not going to block you, too, or anything. You've already proven to me you're a nice person.

Ah, good. I merely asked the question because I was wondering if there was more to it than met the eye. And apparently you did have your reasons for it

I'm talking about Anita. Alison? she's just another "tumblr girl" (but of course, on twitter). why should I care about her?

Guh, the pretentiousness of your tone is overwhelming. I'll save my breath instead of asking for anything regarding Anita. This article isn't even about her anyway. Again, you people are obsessed with her.

Remember that guy who was Sony's TV spokesman, then he ended up in a commercial that featured a Wii and was fired?

Yeah sounds similar in the sense she had another job with a conflict of interest.

But don't you worry gamerzgatererz, you still matter. #NOTREALLY

Wed Mar 30 16 08:49pm
Rating: 2 (Updated 1 time)

Nice insults, man. Way to go. For real.

You're mad I insulted Gamerzgaterz? Really?

We can't just go around insulting entire groups of people. Painting GG as a group full of villains is fear-mongering.

It's not different than saying all Muslims are terrorists.

Fair point. So find me some Twitter handlers of pro-gamerzgaterz who aren't abusive and mean. You certainly don't hear about them. They should work on bumping out their evil members, if they in fact exist.

It's not a group, though. It's a hashtag. There's no hierarchy, Now I do realize that no matter what we as humans will always try to create order where there is none because that's just what we do. Makes things easier for everyone. And with that there will be sort of 'de facto leaders' but the biggest 'de facto leader' doesn't even really do anything with GG anymore. That's Sargon of Akkad.

But I do know some people on Twitter that are pro-GG and very against abuse. Actually, maybe just go to KiA? That's the closest to 'official' GG meeting place you're going to get. If you still want Twitter handles after that I can get you quite a few.

Still waiting for a hashtags hate for kotaku..... And every other game journalist.

I appareciate the detailed response. I'll keep an eye out for GG-pro people that aren't attacking women.... just haven't seen them yet. I odn't go looking for them, I just wait and see what ends up in my timeline. And generally anyone who starts supports supporting personal attacks gets a quick unfollow.

The problem is is that people seem to love to scapegoat GamerGate. Hey, I hate them as much as every other game news site. However I find it incredibly suspicious that sites like kotaku are free to operate.

I don't really get your point. Kotaku is a clickbait gaming website protected by the First Amendment regardless of how anyone feels about them. Whereas GamerGate is a hate group whose harassment is not protected speech, and who moved on from harassing Alison Rapp to harassing Alison Rapp and her family despite her termination.

So what exactly what terrible things has Kotaku done that would warrant their being shuttered, other than their political veiwpoints?

My problem with the entire thing is that GamerGate did the same thing other game sites did. Only this time, people noticed! Either way, that's one less corrupt game site/group..... What are they doing?

My issue with Kotaku is that they jump the goddamn gun sometimes. The whole Alison thing is a perfect example.

There's also this ****** trend on blaming GamerGate for everything.... Even though it probably has been done by other individuals and probably used GamerGate as a scapegoat.

Thanks for replying.

I heard that there was a possibility that the harassers came from some group other than GG. So then, what you're saying is that it's that GG's involvement could be limited to spreading the information just as Kotaku and other websites are doing.

The concern that I have then, were the intentions of both parties in disseminating the story. I don't think that Kotaku's motivation for reporting the story (even if it shows a lack of integrity) is equivalent to GamerGate's motivation for doing the same (which I'm convinced was with the intent of malice) even if the outcome was the same.

As far as the trend for blaming GamerGate for everything goes, I'm in favor of it. Whether or not they're involved in a particular incident, they've become the de facto face of an unorganized, nebulous group, and having someone visible to push back against makes it easier to stop their ideology from propagating any further.

The KKK was dealt with in a similar way. Even if racists still exist they never recovered their numbers or social permeance and other, similar groups never became more than fringe groups.

Yeah, I hardly give a **** about GamerGate. It's just that I'm getting annoyed that when someone ****s up, it's GamerGate's fault (contrary to what neogaf thinks, they are NOT worse than a concept that was historically one of the worst acts humankind can ever do).

So now you're comparing GG to the KKK? You're ridiculous.

So... can we blame all Muslims for terrorism?

All women for infanticide?

You're a fear monger.

He never compared them to the KKK in the sense that he says they're equally bad

But he's also in favor of blaming all Muslims for terrorism. Is that suddenly okay?

I haven't seen him say that. In fact, a quick search on the page shows you saying it three times, but nobody else

No. He doesn't have to. He's in favor of blaming a whole group for the actions of a few. This would have to extend to EVERY group. Otherwise he's a hypocrite and anything he says we can disregard.

I'm just testing to see if he has integrity or not.

There's no proof it was GG. You know assholes will be assholes, right?

Kotaku is part of Gawker. Gawker has actually finally been convicted with doing something illegal.

And when they support personal attacks they're automatically GG? I know of plenty aGG and SJWs that support personal attacks as long as it's the right people.

Yeah, that's the problem I have with all of this. Seriously guys, how can GamerGate be the worst thing ever, if they're just as bad as every other gamer site? For all of GamerGate's faults, anti-GG and (bad) SJWs are no better. Don't believe me? There was a Kickstarter to invent a moderator tool to get rid of trolls and negative speakers. Not only would this be biased, it also threatens freedom of speech (good news is that Kickstarter flagged it)...... Totally not worse than GamerGate!

AND it promoted the spread of the information of minors on a database anyone can access. Let's think.... who would want to know where minors lived......

I don't even remember what this is about anymore.

I'll make this very simple. If you are doing personal attacks and wishing someone be fired/doxed/etc because of video games, you are an a-hole. Period.

Of course harassment is pretty unacceptable.... It's just that the shoe's on the other foot when everyone else is at play, trolls or not.

I want her to be fired because she defends pedophilia which is fucking disgusting, by the way. There seem to be people who disagree. idk if you're one.

I'd have to read her paper to see her views on the matter. My bet is you haven't read that paper yet either.

I'm certainly not OK with it, it is disgusting, but I don't know what she said.

I also don't care that she got fired. Personally, everyone who is involved in any way shape or form with Nintendo's marketing should have been fired over the disaster that was WiiU.

Her paper was basically an argument on how America should lay off of Japan's culture when regarding..... Explicit underage material. Now for the record, she isn't exactly a pedophile and that she was arguing for less strict laws in regards to possessing said material, basically she wants a difference between action and possession.

Unfortunately, a good speaker Alison Rapp is not. Her tweets were extremely vague and had very unfortunate implications. She pretty much set herself up for that. Plus, her thesis is VERY flawed. I'm in the opinion that scum like pedophiles would just get an easy way out if things went her way.

That's not why she was fired, though. Everyone knows that.

Good post. Like what you said. Thumbs up from me.

I HAVE read it, actually. Why would you say I haven't? Do you just love being immature and trying to slide insults into everything?

xcwarrior
Wed Apr 27 16 09:28pm
(Updated 2 times)

Bravo if you did.

It's the Internet, it's definition is "to hate."

Maybe if Nintendo stopped doing stuff to piss its fans off, we all wouldn't be so mad all the time.

I do agree with that. I actually know a fix to the censorship crap that would make everyone happy. Give people an option to patch the game to restore missing content. Nintendo refuses to learn, though.

Think that's bad, there's someone that compared pedophillia to Jews being persecuted by Nazis. That's right, they think pedophilles taking advantage of kids is as much of a victim as Jews (to make things worse, the Twitter user didn't even make a clear difference between pedos that does take advantage of kids or ones that don't)!

Oh, I know. Some people even want to add 'P' to 'LGBT.'

And Salon... oh, god... Salon....
One of the writers for the site admitted to being a pedo and called everyone else monsters for judging him. Jesus Christ. The world is going to hell.

If anyone in charge of the LGBT groups had any common sense, they'd straight up out them from the onset.

I think a lot of people do but they're afraid of being called bigots.

Sounds like they supported her nasty habits

My guess is they're just trying to be short and sweet, but they figured out the issue that her nasty habits were causing.

Shut up. Don't make this about your beliefs vs. hers.

Yeah don't tell me what to do. Who do you think you are? Looks like you support her nasty habits too.

They probably avoided bringing it up just so there wouldn't be a ton of articles from mainstream outlets with "Nintendo" and "child porn" in the same sentence. Because the last thing Nintendo wants as a keyword associated with them is child porn.

I guess Rapp can dispute this if she wants. Even if it's not what we all assumed it was about, it's still consistent with the tone of her earlier comments.

I'm sure if she does contest it they'll drop it all on her. Wish they would just go ahead and do that now.

And this children it's what corporates call "Damage Controll".

Good riddance Ms. Rapp.

Well it seems there's more to the story than we thought, like I feared. The harassment was still inexcusable behavior though. But second job? What could that be? Unless it was something she did randomly in her home town on her breaks from the HQ, I don't get how it would be possible for her to have two jobs. That being said, if this is proven true, then like Chris Pranger, unfortunately this firing would be justified, although I'm still a firm believer that the harassment did end up having some negative effects on NOA's morale.

It's damage control.

And she actually harassed me, believe it or not.

She said any hate I experienced was my fault because I was a man and the women spewing the hate weren't at fault.

As if I inherit the wrongdoings of my forefathers.

What next? Are we going to blame the children of murderers for the murders?

She was a radical feminist that used a blockbot that actually made it difficult for some indie devs to get in touch because they had the "wrong friends" and they had to jump through hoops.

Honestly, I think it's very likely that she was lying out of her teeth. Still, radical feminism is something that can really destroy your rep as a company.

Yep. It's pretty messed up stuff.

I don't doubt you on that. I've actually suffered from horrific abuse in my past, and I did unfollow her for a bit when she got a bit crazy when she said a dumb statement about how men never get sexually abused (which is 100% false because I've had said experience and I really hate talking about it due to shame). The fact that she does have real views like that is undeniable. But still, it didn't give any of the extreme harassers any right to abuse her.

At the end of the day, it seems both sides are at fault: Her for having her opinions cross the line a few times, and the harassers (who really weren't from GG and were mostly from that FE Fates spam campaign) for jumping the line and acting all rabid and crazy when they could have expressed their dislike for the changes in a peaceful manner.

That sucks, man. Sorry to hear about that.

I think this whole thing could have gone better if no one threatened her and then she wouldn't have been able to say that someone threatened her and add supporters to her side (not to say that I think she is above lying).

The worst thing I think is she is trying to play the victim when she has been defending the victimization of children for years.

8_bit_boy
Wed Mar 30 16 08:54pm
Rating: 2

I don't know what to believe anymore

In this case, it's easy. You think Nintendo would fire her for an entirely different reason? This is Damage Control 101 for Dummies.

solargamer
Wed Mar 30 16 08:54pm
Rating: 1

And this is why we don't jump to conclusions. And make wild ass-pull assumptions. If only the games press could learn this lesson. Too bad they never do.

This is all damage control anyway.

What do you mean jump to conclusions? This is literally some of the most blatant damage control I've ever encountered.

Oh, would you like at that. Turns out she violated company policy. If they were just blowing smoke, don't think they'd be so specific as to which policy it was.

Nintendo were just looking for a reason to fire her after all that happened. The fact that this is damage control doesn't mean it's a lie. It might be entirely true that she has a second job, and that would definitely be against policy. However they might have been aware of that since a long time ago and they are now using it as the easy way out. It's most unfortunate that fanboys will actually buy this as the genuine reason they fired her, but hey, if they didn't then Nintendo would have no reason to do damage control in the first place. Ignorance is a bliss.

aiddon
Wed Mar 30 16 08:59pm
Rating: 1

And yet we're gonna have people putting this up as some sort of victory against "censorship." Despite the fact that Rapp didn't work in script localization and was PR. It's always funny when ignorance rears its ugly head.

grcpan
Wed Mar 30 16 09:01pm
Rating: 1

Nintendo just reached a whole new level of censorship

panurgejr
Wed Mar 30 16 09:09pm
Rating: 1

If you care about censorship issues at all it's best not to extend the term so far that it becomes meaningless; that way when actual censorship appears people will still be willing to listen and won't have already tuned you out.

A second job.

What?

Twitter poster, what else?

fangzthewolf
Wed Mar 30 16 09:07pm
Rating: 1 (Updated 1 time)

She did photoshoots/modeling on the side it looks like, but I am not sure if this the second job Nintendo was referring to.

She talked about it on Twitter in the beginning of February.

I remember that. They were fairly racy.

I'm guessing it could either be TOTALLY unrelated or it was her sjw nonsense

"in conflict with Nintendo’s corporate culture" not just any old second job....

I don't believe it's so much that she had a secondary job (as many, MANY people have two or more jobs, just to stay afloat... granted, I'm sure that a position at Nintendo pays decently)... but that the second job conflicted with Nintendo's interests.

"...a second job in conflict with Nintendo’s corporate culture."

Whatever her second job is, I feel that it was something Nintendo did not want to be associated with. It's one thing when someone says dumb things on the Internet, but it's another when you're getting paid to do something that conflicts with your other employer.

I seriously doubt her termination had anything to do with "GG", as I don't think anyone takes them seriously. Her stances on child pornography are certainly... questionable... but even that, I'm not sure would be grounds for termination. After all, her college papers are publicly linked to on her LinkedIn profile, so Nintendo likely knew about it before hiring her (at least, that is my guess).

artten
Wed Mar 30 16 09:28pm
(Updated 1 time)

Translation, we don't like your viewpoint and if we could fire you on it, we would! So instead we going to dig and find something that we can fire you for. That's how I read this statement. All between the lines of course.

Oh boy, this is going to be the next big outrage, isn't it? >_> I mean, I'm sorry that someone lost their job, but I'm just sick to death of all these sensational controversies and conspiracies in the gaming industry at large. More power to you all, but I play and talk about video games to have fun.

yomanation
Wed Mar 30 16 09:36pm
(Updated 1 time)

You could always not visit these threads. That's what people told me when I complained about amiibo bullshit taking up 50% of the pages.

But now your bullshit comments take up 50% of the comment page (;

And yet they are less obnoxious than your single comment that I just reported.

Glad to know I never have to buy a Nintendo product again.

Because they fired a pedophile and child porn defender? Glad to know where you stand.

Oh, good God. Not you too. She wasn't a pedophilia defender, and you have to know that. Don't try to spin this narrative into something it's not.

She did, though. Do you want the links?

I already have read the entirety of her thesis (from over 5 years ago) about Japanese pornography law, as well as all of her out-of-context tweets (also from 5 years ago…) that prove how despicable of a human being she is, but thank you.

She's also stated numerous times since those old tweets how her views on age of consent, possession of illicit material, and Japan's pornography laws have developed over the years… but I guess you don't have to bring those up if you want to spin the narrative that she's a pedophile. It's blown out of proportion, mate.

No. I'm talking about her defending an actual pedophile. I never said she was a pedophile. It would be decent of you to not put words in my mouth.

All I ever said was that she defended pedophiles and child porn.

And how about a link on her saying that her views have developed? I haven't seen them tbh.

Don't start getting upset with me. I apologize for my phrasing, as I meant "pedophile apologist", not "pedophile". Everything else I said still stands. Almost six years ago, she wrote an academic paper, which I implore you to read, about Japanese pornography law and age of consent. It's been taken out of context hundreds of times, as has that tweet saying something along the lines of "I'm defending the non-censorship of child pornography, run away!". You can't take something out of context like that and call it "proof".

As for the tweets where she talks about her developing views, uh, I guess I'll get back to you on that? I'm aware that sounds awful, but I don't know of a way to search her tweets in a concise manner that will yield the ones I'm looking for. I'm confident they exist, because I've seen them with my own eyes.

I read it. It's disgusting.

Yeah, sure. Get back to me on that. ;)

Did you really? You asked me if I supported child rape. If you actually read it, then surely you must be aware that the paper calls for a harsher sentence for actual child exploitation and trafficking as opposed to possession of illicit imagery, particularly fictional depictions thereof, right?

Please treat me with a little respect. I admitted from the start that what I said sounded bad. I'm still here, over an hour later, feverishly searching for a way to find these tweets.

She is fooling everyone. She defended a literal pedophile and has called for AoC laws to be lowered.

W-what? So now her paper, the main piece of evidence against her, is part of some kind of ruse? She's fooling everyone? What?

The man you're referring possessed copious amounts of child pornography. Enough that his indictment was harsher than that of most actual rapists and other child abusers. She wasn't defending the man for being indicted, she was criticizing the harshness of the penalty. The only thing I recall her saying about the age of consent was in her thesis; something about why Japan's AoC was not inherently "wrong" because it isn't the same as that of the Western world.

Can you prove that's what she meant? She argued for the legalization of child pornography. Following that logic she was against him being convicted at all.

Except she did not argue for the legalization of it at all. I already told you that. Her paper was about harsher penalties for sexual abuse and less harsh penalties for possession. The two are currently almost equal in severity around the world, and that's including possession of explicit depictions of underage fictional characters. Whether you agree with that or not, you really need to stop twisting it into "she's a pedophile defender".

Prove something to me first.

cevee
Thu Mar 31 16 10:16am
Rating: 1

The poster can't. That's why they keep trying to move the goal post.

It's also obvious that this poster, and several others, never actually read her paper at all. That they are simply going off of what they were 'told'. Unless there has been a decline in reading comprehension more than I ever imagined.

Because they fired one person? That's a rather extreme viewpoint.

But, whatever, man. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

panurgejr
Wed Mar 30 16 09:45pm
Rating: 1

I'm sorry to hear that you were ever forced to buy something you didn't want. Guess I didn't realize how lucky I was that every time I bought a Nintendo game it was voluntary.

That brings back memories.

I remember Yamauchi holding a revolver to my head as he forced me to buy Star Fox Assault. In hindsight I'm thankful. The game gets a bad rap but it's great. What was your first coerced purchase? Smile /s

bpm
Wed Mar 30 16 09:56pm
Rating: 1

The Stamper Bros. tied me up while David Wise tortured my ear drums to force me to buy Star Fox Adventures.
I ain't saying that Wise's music is bad (it's great!), just not this torture session.

I was never coerced into buying anything, but when I was young I could only play the games my parents bought for me and my brothers, and not just any game I wanted. Such privation...

rsmith7
Wed Mar 30 16 09:36pm
Rating: 2 (Updated 1 time)

Don't like where all this is going... At least Nintendo explain why she was fired, but people have their own opinions/ideas what really happen, rather if it's true or not. Ugh.... Not looking forward to the crap that's going to come out of this... Headache here I come.

It's easier said than done, but what I've learned after years of reading headache inducing internet drama is to just walk away from it.

If you're strong willed, stay away from the Nintendo/Game related sites for the next few days or so. If you're weak willed (like me) and run into an article related to this drama, just muster every ounce of your will to not click to the comment section and keep on scrolling

Unless there's some new bit of information that will paint Nintendo or this lady in a whole new light, there's pretty much nothing else to gain from this story.

rsmith7
Wed Mar 30 16 11:02pm
(Updated 1 time)

That's all true. But sometimes it's hard to resists reading these things because of "bile fascination". It's like a train wreck you just can't look away from. Of course, there are other sites out there that can handle the whole situation way more better then this and gaming other sites, Mostly because the contributors aren't being controlled by their emotions and bias.

Guh… I don't know what to think, but I don't have any reason to believe they would lie. I can typically identify wishy-washy PR talk, but this statement seems pretty straightforward. They'd have to be blatantly lying otherwise. This is really unfortunate timing, if true. People are going to use this incident for their own political gain, and that's awful.

She did have a conflicting job but I don't think they cared until now.

The job involved taking fairly racy photos and distributing them online.

Oh yeah, I am aware of that, actually. I was wondering what sort of "second job" they were talking about, but that makes perfect sense. Like you said though, they probably wouldn't have noticed/cared if all this controversy hadn't arisen in the first place. It's actually almost comforting to know this isn't a black-and-white issue, even though it's not good for either side. Nintendo's still going to bear the brunt of some shitty PR for a while, and it's not completely undeserved.

These obnoxious SJWs blame GG for everything.
This has everything to do with NOA family friendly nonsense being incompatible with the caliber of things this girl tweeted, ranging from polygamy to zoophilia and nothing to do with GG.

I'm with you but I think the zoophilia started off as a joke based on a tweet taken out of context.

But yeah. She's repulsive.

Just found out about his. I doubt this one lady at Nintendo Has that much sway over that kind of thing. Also these changes ARE NOT CENSORSHIP (the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts)!! They are localization changes based on the norms of the US.

First of all, people found those parts unacceptable for western values which is why they were removed.

Secondly, she's a pedophile and child porn defender.

Is censorship the new strawman for people? Seriously guys, whatever she did obviously violated Nintendo's policy. No one goes to pbs kids where the host is a pedo.

Wtf is going on over at Nin! So far my count is 3 long time staff memebers no longer work there. I wonder if they will group up later on this year & form their own studio? Fkn crazy that this is happening in the 1st place!

What would they do?

Crap on fans, insult Sakurai, and defend child porn? You can't make a game with that.

thomas
Wed Mar 30 16 10:43pm
Rating: 2

I don't blame Nintendo for their choice. They are not responsible for GameGate or her actions. GameGate exposing her, leading them to look more intro her and seeing things they didn't like isn't Nintendo's fault. They did what they had to do.

Looking @ her tweets. IDK if this is some kind of narrative GG has created or not, but I'm not liking what I'm seeing. She seems weirdly obsessed with pedophilia and Nintendo was right to fire her for that.

With what happened with swapnote is it really surprising that a person that has these views would be fired?

There's quite a bit of drama going around everywhere, but in my opinion after some digging, seems Ninty's on the right on this one.

Spoiler

Want to join this discussion?

You should like, totally log in or sign up!