Alison Rapp Is Entitled to Her Academic Views, But Her Defense Of Actual Child Pornography Distributors Is Unforgivable

I recently found out Alison Rapp, a Nintendo product marketing employee, wrote a thesis on why Japan shouldn’t be forcing such strict enforcement of anti-child porn laws.

The thesis can be found here:

First off, Rapp published this as an academic exercise, that is entirely legal. Also, merely as a philosophical POV, arguing for such a subject matter is part of an academic discussion and also protected. I disagree with her views, but they are legal, and according to her thesis and her defenders, she claims she is referring to lolicon and shotacon, which are legal under US law, and if so, I can see the both the academic and legal merits to her thesis

Here are her own words on the subject:

Admittedly, I can’t disagree with most of this on the face of it, though age of consent laws are a slippery slope, and frankly, I believe most standard US limits are quite reasonable as is, and I could not in good conscience wish for them to drop any lower than is legally allowable in any state in the US. In fact, I’m all in favor of age 18 as a bare minimum nationwide.

This is where it gets vaguer:

If she’s referring merely to relaxing laws on depictions of fictional child porn (i.e. - lolicon/shotacon), I can see the merit in that, as unlike live action child pornography, no actual child is harmed in the production, dissemination, or viewing of that material. Live action child porn is absolutely off the table as far as I and current US law are concerned, I would unilaterally oppose and condemn her if she ever argued in favor of any relaxation of laws on the illegality of live action child pornography.

“Child sexual agency”………..OH HELL NO. This is classic pedophile double talk for “allowing children to explore their sexual natures”, a wedge to make pedophilia seem natural…………and I say fuck that bullshit, you’re just a goddamned child molestor looking for an excuse to fondle children.

One problem Rapp: Lolicon/shotacon, that’s understandable. Live-action, fuck you, I will NOT stand for anyone trying to argue live action child pornography should NOT be censored. Unlike you, I don’t want children sexually exploited.

And this is where Rapp crosses the line into the indefensible:

The article is this:

Frankly, if Alison Rapp believes someone arrested for material that is illegal in the US (actual children pornography) shouldn’t be punished for that, than all due respect, I hope you burn in Hell for enabling pederasts, and apologia for their perversions is morally and legally wrong.

As I understand it, she still holds a position with Nintendo of America, and while I do not believe she deserves to be fired merely for her academic positions, she has crossed the line with white knighting an actual possessor of child pornography, and I urge everyone who don’t want a child pornography apologist working in an industry that produces material for the consumption of minors to contact Nintendo and petition them to relieve her of any position where she has any power over that media.

A good place to start is here:

P.S. - Due to information submitted by Jake Rapp, I have corrected the lede to note Alison Rapp works in product marketing, not public relations. This was an error based on a misconception on my part, my gratitude to Mr. Rapp for correcting my error.