Rachel Richardson played volleyball for Duke. She was the only black on the team. On August 22, 2022, she claimed she was the target of racial epithets by fans or a fan while her team played at BYU. She was specific and claimed it happened repeatedly. It made national news. But it never happened. Other than Richardson claiming it happened there is no evidence that it did happen.
Brad Slager at RedState wrote of the alleged incident:
As the press was unspooling the dastardly acts and pontificating on what it all means, they failed to wait and learn if it had happened at all. An investigation was conducted into the game’s events , and there came to be found quite a bit of contradictory evidence – or, more accurately, there was a stark lack of evidence.
Richardson had been rather specific about when during the game she absorbed these insults, specifically at the times she served near that section. This would involve only about half the game, as the teams switch sides, and thus a study of the game film was conducted. In the early portions of the game, when she stated the individual insulted her, they were not present in the section. At other times, the individual was seen using their phone and not paying direct attention to Richardson.
Weeks of investigation by BYU followed. And, no doubt, ESPN’s race-baiters and other race-hustling “journalists” from MSNBC, CNN, and Al Sharpton trying to find any evidence that someone, somewhere in the BYU arena may have said something racist at Richardson. There was nothing. Silence.
But a lack of evidence didn’t stop Duke alum and general ESPN apologist Jay Bilas from doubling down on stupid.
We stand with and up for Rachel Richardson. https://t.co/swnFWYe8zW
— Jay Bilas (@JayBilas) September 9, 2022
We? Who is this “we”? Well, there were those who ignore evidence and go with “racism!” where none exists. Jay (who is a lawyer) found company in Dawn Staley
Dawn Staley is the head coach of South Carolina’s women’s basketball team. She wasn’t the coach of Duke’s volleyball team, but Staley is black. She jumped into the “I don’t need evidence” mosh pit. Her team had a game scheduled against BYU. Even thought there was zero evidence to support Richardson’s claim, Staley took a stand. Against evidence. She announced that her team would not play BYU at BYU. AND, BYU would not be allowed play at South Carolina. Yup, she canceled two games because Richardson claimed she was targeted. Staley took the word of Richardson and ignored the mountain of evidence that Richardson’s claim of racism, never happened. Why would she do such a thing? You can draw your own conclusions, but Richardson is black. So is Staley.
Fast forward to, this year, and specifically yesterday’s media day interviews of the two teams playing for the women’s basketball national championship. On Saturday, Outkick’s Dan Zaksheske asked Dawn Staley an important question. “Do you support transgenders playing women’s sports?”. The answer should be simple.
“No I don’t support men who claim to be women competing against actual women.”
That question was put to Staley. Will she welcome biological men who “identify” as women? She didn’t hesitate. Yes, yes she will.
I’m of the opinion of, if you’re a woman, you should play. If you consider yourself a woman and you want to play sports or vice versa, you should be able to play. That’s my opinion. You want me to go deeper?
Staley went deep into the well anti-women rhetoric. She said:
That’s the question you want to ask, I’ll give you that. Yes, yes. So now the barnstormer people are going to flood my timeline and be a distraction to me on one of the biggest days of our game, and I’m okay with that. I really am.
As one would expect, X (Twitter), went nuts. Not with sanity but the insanity that invades reality. A USA Today pseudo-journalist made the less-than-vailed suggestion that the question was racially motivated. Staley supporting dudes competing against women is a good thing accordin to Armour. Armour was sure, it seems, that Staley was asked the question only because she is black. More of twitter geniuses claimed Iowa’s white coach wasn’t asked the question. But Iowa’s coach was asked the question.
There was also this clown is connected to the University of South Carolina sports.
Iowa’s coach should have answered the question directly, but she likely feared reprisals for stating facts. Pretend women are not real women. She deflected and didn’t answer specifically. And, Iowa’s team is mostly white. The question the woke left assumed was motivated and directed at the black coach of the predominantly black team was also asked of the white coach of the mostly white team. Narrative busted. But facts never stop “experts” like Jay Bilas.
The question was legitimate. Women should compete against other women. A man pretending to be a woman, competing as a woman will ruin women’s basketball like it ruined women’s swimming. “Lia” Thomas was a man before he decided he was a woman. Outkick has asked these questions before.
Thomas the man was a rather average college swimmer when competing against fellow men. You never heard of Thomas because he was background noise when competing as a man. That changed when Thomas “switched teams” and swam as a “woman”. Thomas dominated. Why isn’t a mystery. Biological men competing as women in any sport is unfair to actual women. It will ruin basketball like it has ruined every sport that has allowed it. Thomas ruined women’s swimming, and Staley is willing to ruin women’s basketball.
Staley will welcome biological men likely because she doesn’t care about women’s rights like she seems to care about fake racism. She is willing to “cheat” to win. Bring a man on. He’ll dominate women’s basketball for Coach Staley. If it happens one thing Staley will be able to claim – She’ll finally have a player who can dunk.
How in the world is this ever to be corrected? What do these people aim to accomplish with these lies? This continues my opinion that most sportswriters are only interested in shock stories more than actual stories about accomplishments in sport and the greatness that can result when the focus is on sport. Women have no choice but to participate if they are on a scholarship. These athletes will be required to risk injury or lose their opportunity for an education. This is allowed by authorities only for the freak show factor of watching the ruckus unfold, meaning the spectators have no actual interest in the event only in the ensuing craziness. It’s a ratings/advertising bonanza; if we get to see a female carted off the court or field, then we get see a very profitable rise in viewership and headline news. How does this end? Will it end? Are headed to gladiator days or are we already there? God help the young, collegiate, female athlete. Personally, I would love to see a rise in the chess club et. al. PS-South Carolina is a super place! I am happy for those ladies!
Jenny in Maine