As someone who said correlation not causation lets pump the breaks before concluding Nintendo caved to GG pressure, I still basically stand by that. Her second job would have gotten her fired once it came out it was only a matter of when not if Nintendo would discover it. The fact GG targeted her was wrong and the fact they continue to do so is disgusting we all can agree on that, we can also discuss if Nintendo did enough to protect her from online harassment and based upon the fact she is still being attacked almost two weeks after being fired I'm not really sure what Nintendo could have done if anything to really curb the hate group, but let's not just completely give Rapp a pass here. It's in her right to speak her feminist/progressive views on social media if she chooses to, but if she picks up the kind of secondary job that would get you fired from a lot of places in corporate America you put yourself forever at risk that one day someone at your company will discover it and fire you. She has not and still does not deserve the hate group going after her, but based upon a contract she signed to work at Nintendo she did deserve to be fired due to her own actions.
Sure, maybe it would've, but that's not the point. The point is people were using it as a deflection tactic. The only reason they found out about the second job was because of her harassments.
Saying "but what if they found it some other way, eventually" is just deflecting from the actual reason why it came to light. That's why I consider it a weak argument. I get where it comes from, but it became tiring to have people bring up the same things over and over again and make the discussion go in circles, rather than discussing the actual meat of the issue.
Now I agree that it probably wasn't smart for WaPo to disclose what the second job is rumoured to be. But then, if you wanted to bring it up, you could observe that the only reason the second job was considered a bad thing is because we live in the kind of environment that fosters ideals like shaming women for being openly-sexual, which have become nature to GG. That's a whole discussion in itself and I'm not sure how directly relevant it is, but I thought that was an intriguing point to make.
EDIT: Also totally forgot the most important new point of all!! Regardless of how anyone feels about her, her family and friends do NOT deserve any of the BS that resulted from this situation and its fallback.
I was one of those people, and I'll repeat basically what I said before. I still believe the reasons for her firing, as explained by Nintendo, and assuming they weren't lying, were justified. The timing made it suspicious, but coincidences happen.
With regards to them not really commenting during her harassment, yes I believe they could have said something and shown some solidarity, but I also STILL believe it wouldn't have done anything to "stop" the harassment or even quell it. It was pretty well known that she had nothing to do with those decisions, and it's common sense that a PR person wouldn't have anything to do with localization. The people harassing her weren't really operating from any sort of rational basis. It was pure misogyny, babies being butthurt over perceived "censorship" and them taking out their anger on an almost random bystander.
So to me, the issues are more deep seeded than just being games, or games fostering a certain culture. I think society has been fostering this kind of thing for a long time and platforms like twitter are just making us aware of it and giving said people more power. I'm not saying they shouldn't have said anything, I'm just saying that I doubt it would have done anything to help. Nintendo has no power over twitter and them coming out and saying "Don't harass people" (which they did in the statement given about her firing) wasn't exactly going to cause these people to turn over a new leaf.
Also, like I said in that other thread, articles like this while bringing shit like this to light also seem to have the negative effect of causing more of the targets personal life and details to surface. Instead of what happened to them taking focus, the completely irrelevant things (What was her second job? Was that the real reason Nintendo fired her? Blah blah essay blah blah) always seem to be pushed into the lime light which is unfortunate.
I guess I'm just a progressive person. Nothing personal but I feel like the third paragraph can come off as kind of defeatist. It's better, in my opinion, to at least try and get either potential success or potential failure, then do nothing and guarantee failure.
It's a grey area, I agree... But I just think in a situation like this where people's lives are at stake, a defeatist attitude isn't ideal.
