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'.