What is Riley Gaines hiding? We investigated…

This podcast is about what Riley Gaines is hiding. I don't believe she has 'hidden' anything that they have mentioned. And Madison Pauly has made Riley Gaines the hinge pin of the protection of female sports movement which I believe comes across as Pauly just trying to demonise Riley Gaines. Pauly certainly doesn't come across as being balanced at all and doesn't come across as knowledgeable about the female sports movement at all.

Like the Webberley interviews though, this podcast is not aimed at those who have the background and the knowledge about this specific topic. It will seem convincing in a sensationalist way to those who won't look further to understand what this really is all about.

It is hypocritical really when you consider it. These two people are making money off their work on Riley Gaines, but Riley Gaines is not allowed to make money for her work.

Because Riley Gaines is to be vilified, of course.

They have compared her MO as being 'like Charlie Kirk'.

Thst is almost incitement. I wonder how much of RG increased fee income needs to be spent on security?

Because we all live our lives by what AI says.

Every time that poster says 'this is what it is called, how it is said etc, in Australia', I laugh. I am obviously not only not womaning properly by many of their standards, but am obviously not 'Australian' enough. I think almost every time they refer to an Australianism, I think 'WTAF? No we don't!'

Advanced Search and going out onto other platforms such as Instagram and X to search for a poster’s handle are completely different things. Twisting this doxxing attempt back onto me as “I should be upset that women have to do this in the first place” and I’m gaslighting you - unbelievable.

I am at 39 mins now. They have compared her MO as being 'like Charlie Kirk'. And explain how she travels campuses to campaign for female sports to be protected. Plus they mention that she did a podcast with Kirk too and made a point of stating that her complaining that forcing women and girls to be in a changing room with a male person is those women and girls taking part in that male person's fetish is her 'transphobia'.

They allow the Kirk podcast to play a snippet and Kirk then discusses that this is abhorrent etc. Torre doesn't clarify that RG didn't say the things that Kirk says at all. He then muses that the discussion has moved on from unfairness in sport to 'criminality' (referring to male people being in the female changing rooms).

I think that these two podcasters think that women should never have mentioned the changing room situation and that them doing so is hateful.

At 42 mins they move onto Simone Biles. There is discussion about the tweets and that RG has referred to 'predatory men' in relation to male people who are in female changing rooms and female sport.

Now at 46 minutes we get to payment:

"And what you wind up seeing in these documents is that over the last three years from 2023 to 2025, speaker fees for Riley Gains as paid out by various state and local Republican committees have more than octupled. So in 2023, we have Riley Gaines making $3,000 at an appearance in Kentucky. in 2024, we're seeing a $13,929 fee from the Republican Central Committee in Nevada.

And then on uh page 45 of a filing from Harris County Republicans in Texas this past June, $25,000. Again, more than eight times bigger than 2 years earlier, tracking right alongside the sharpening and perfecting of this whole trans inclusion as sexual assault argument from Riley Gaines in dozens upon dozens and dozens of appearances all over Fox News."

Then as a director of the Riley Gaines Center, she is paid a fee of $126,523. The 'center' is there to campaign for the protection of female sports. They have uncovered some of the donors as being right wing funders.

At 50 minutes they then list all the things that I think that they blame Riley Gaines for. Including 'normalising' discussions about protecting female sport.

"She has remade American public policy in her image. The movement that she is the face of works because her story, her storytelling is believed by so many parents and Americans who see this story through her eyes. We've got the NCAA ban, we've got the Olympic ban, we've got these kinds of policy changes that, you know, and this is a key point, could actually maybe be undone in the future pretty easily.

You know, if we get a new president, maybe there's a new executive order, maybe the US Olympic parolympic committee changes its mind. So, the conundrum for Riley Gaines right now is how do we make these policy changes, these transports bans permanent or at least more permanent than Trump?

Mhm. How do you make them apply nationwide so that no trans girl, K12, college, even blue states, New York, California, none of them can play on a girls team. And how do you do that permanently?

Use the courts. A new lawsuit could have a big impact on who can and who can't compete in college sports. Riley Gaines and 15 other female athletes just filed a lawsuit against the NCAA. She says this development was due time and that the NCAA has been served. Gains v NCAA. "

I cannot imagine what all the other female sports campaigners think of this narrative. Nor the 15 other athletes in the court case.

At 58 minutes, Pauly discusses ICONs and dismisses the founders, both elite sportswomen in their own rights as 'Swim moms'. In any case, the issue apparently is that ICONS is now worth over a million dollars and they went from $100K to over $1M in two years. And they are capitalising on the 'gateway drug' that is women's sport - 'gateway drug' to anti-trans radicalisation.

ICONS has also been formed to support women and girls in their court cases, and this was mentioned. However, it was mentioned as being a negative and that those funds are not from just everyday donors as well. It is then discussed that XX-XY has donated. So what?

XX-XY raises money through merchandise etc. It is another female sports campaign group. But apparently, they are noteworthy of being mentioned as donating some of their proceeds (which are raised for the express purpose of campaigning for female sports protections) to ICONS.

This was new for me:

At 1.01 : "They have a lawsuit out there, a whole other one saying that we have the right to misgender people."

But here is the case (this is my addition and only mentioned in passing in the podcast):

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/activist-sportswear-brand-sues-colorado-accuses-state-censoring-its-message

"The women's activist sportswear brand XX-XY Athletics is suing the state of Colorado over a recent state law that the company claims would interfere with its ability to market its message.

The lawsuit takes aim at the state for passing a law called HB25-1312 and amending the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which defines "gender expression" to include "chosen name" and "how an individual chooses to be addressed." The laws state Coloradans have a right to access "public accommodations and advertising" that are free of discrimination on that basis.

The company's lawsuit claims that the state's new legislation would make it illegal for the brand to carry out certain viral marketing campaign techniques it has used since launching last year."

I am giving up now as I have to get to work. But I think that from what I have heard, what has taken 'six months' of investigating amounts to 'No shit, Sherlock'.

Me either! I don't even care if he has a penis or not, males don't belong in any female single sex space.

And I for one would not like that at all. I do not want to change in the same room as a man. End of.

just get the penis owner out of the female changing room. There is nothing hard about this.

😂

Stop moving the goalposts from

"was there or was there not a penis in the changing room"
to

"Was or wasn't the penis in the changing room visible to women, the cunty kind"
to

"Did she or did she not see the penis in the changing room".

just get the penis owner out of the female changing room. There is nothing hard about this.

You're about as Australian as Moctezuma.

Oh! The tone went straight over my head sorry😬

Tbf it has happened to so many women already, it was immediately plausible!

Mention of Cricket reminded me of the rowing guidance that TWAW for women’s teams but TWAM for mixed teams. I think they had to row back (see what I did there) from that position pretty quickly if memory serves.

Haha thought I’d throw it in there to confuse

don't mention the cricket.... 😱 triggered

Always worth remembering how many men get very excited at the idea of perving on women undressing in swimming pool changing rooms.

There were numerous Mumsnet threads about this charmer (link below) - which is where posters understood about the challenges for young elite women swimmers in putting on their swim gear and how this necessitated periods of nudity. On this occasion British Swimming were quick to see the threat and banned him promptly.
The data about indecent exposure and voyeurism in swim changing rooms is alarming. Odd to see it so desperately defended on here. 🤔

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12350741/Parents-raised-concerns-transgender-pool-official-using-womens-changing-room-time-young-girls.html

In the same way that JKR is attacked so viciously. She is so self evidently right and reasonable, she must be destroyed.

Only a bloke would take over a thread completely like they are the OP - it’s not cricket……

I was being tongue in cheek 😬

i think riley gained is attacked because she knows her subject and is articulate. She can talk with authority about it, unlike her critics.

Now they have reached the point where they are discussing the actual race where Thomas and RG tied. And apparently, RG giving an interview and saying that she felt that NCAA put Thomas ahead of her by giving Thomas the trophy is the sign of the 'turning point' where RG became vocal about this issue.

The podcasters are acting like Riley had no reason to be upset. They are laughing about her reaction on camera. They discuss the story being picked up by the Daily Wire and Riley doing interviews.

Again, I am not sure what Madison Pauly believes she is 'exposing' here.

It seems that Pauly and Torre are surprised that interviewers mention sharing of the locker room. They are discussing it like it was unusual to discuss the implications of this and it seems like they think that Riley 'changed' her views in these interviews because some interviewers mentioned it.

At 34 minutes we come to the anonymous person, who has previously referred to Riley as being a 'bitch', as saying that Thomas only ever used a towel when she, personally, was around. And expressed sympathy that Thomas never asked to be put into that situation.

Then Pauly mentions with seeming surprise that Riley 'gets involved with politics'. ie. that Riley campaigns to the Kentucky state legislature to have male people excluded from female sports. Apparently, one month after the incident is far too quick in Pauly's mind.

And then, shock horror, Torre mentions that during the mid term election campaigns, Riley is in ads to call for people to support female sports. In the middle of a mid term election year, he emphasises. They even show Riley saying clearly that particular candidates support making female sport female only and that is why she is supporting him or her. She then spoke at CPAC and was introduced by Trump as a 'beautiful swimmer'.

The discussion then seems to take a twist that Riley is being used as a convenient tool in political campaigning because there are 'so few trans athletes'. Perhaps Pauly doesn't think that women can campaign on a topic using whatever platform they can kind, and instead is trying to paint Riley as a victim?

Pauly says this:

"But as you know, Pablo, like the problem that they have is that they just don't have a lot of trans athletes to point to. There are very, very few of them. So, how do you see that this is a real problem? It's extremely convenient to go point at somebody like Riley Gaines who can say, "Hi, I was a victim of this."**

• Who can go sit in the Kentucky legislature and say, "Look, there is a real victim of these policies." And that's I think why her story breaks through. Yeah. There just aren't enough examples of female athletes period who are losing to trans athletes because there aren't that many trans athletes in general. And that's I think why her story breaks through.*

Torres and Pauly both agree that this is an issue that shouldn't be given so much air time. And they are commenting how she is making comments not just for herself but on behalf of girls everywhere.

Its easy to assume posters are male when they dont seem to have the experience to even imagine what it would be like for women. Its not just that hes exposing his penis, its that he's looking at women undressing too.

He's in no physical or sexual danger, is celebrated for exposure and voyeurism, in fact. And the women are ridiculed and are smeared for speaking out.

Its a very strange women who cannot put herself or her relatives in that situation. Women usually pretend it isnt happening and focus on something else - she wasnt going to win anyway, or something.

As well as everything that has been said here, i think riley gained is attacked because she knows her subject and is articulate. She can talk with authority about it, unlike her critics.

Yet here you are posting on a thread about her.

RG has managed to be pretty successful in her fight for fair sports for women in the states. Of course she alone did not cause Trump to win the last election or get him to overturn Biden’s executive order that destroyed women’s sports there, but she was certainly influential.

for you @SexRealismBeliefs that's horrible, I'm sorry that happened to you!

"admission"! You do give yourself away. Blaming women for being in their own changing room and seeing something they shouldn't, and don't want to.

And you meant "citing evidence", not "sighting evidence", at 4:56.