In July 2021, at the Tokyo Olympics, Simone Biles—already widely celebrated as perhaps the greatest gymnast of all time—made a decision that shook the sports world. Overwhelmed by mental health concerns, she withdrew from Olympic competition. For many, it was an act of courage—a turning point. But not everyone saw it that way. Among her harshest critics was conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, who called her a “selfish sociopath” and a “shame to the country.” These words struck Biles deeply and ignited a debate that goes far beyond gymnastics: how we think about mental health, heroism, and what we expect from people in the public eye.

This article examines what really happened, how public discourse shaped both Biles’ narrative and public perception, and what questions remain. It also investigates recent viral claims and misinformation, assesses the impact on Biles and broader culture, and considers what we can learn.

Part I: What Charlie Kirk Actually Said—and Why It Matters

On July 27, 2021, Simone Biles withdrew from the women’s team final at the Tokyo Olympics, citing mental health struggles, including the effects of a condition known as “the twisties” (a dangerous state that can affect a gymnast’s spatial awareness). She spoke publicly about not feeling safe to continue.

Charlie Kirk responded on his podcast and in media appearances. Among his comments:

He called Biles a “selfish sociopath.”
He said she was a “shame to the country.”
He also criticized her decision as a failure of resilience, implying that by withdrawing, she had let down her nation and teammates.

These were not passing remarks. They went beyond critique of decision-making into deeply personal territory, overlapping with national pride and the expectation that public figures should “push through” adversity even at cost to themselves.

These words matter because they reflect a broader social narrative: that mental health is weakness, that withdrawing from pressure is betrayal, and that public figures (especially athletes) are required to prioritize medals and national reputation over individual well-being.

Part II: Simone Biles’ Response—What We Know and What We Don’t

Since that time, Biles has spoken openly about her mental health in interviews, events, and advocacy work. She has become a powerful voice for athlete mental wellness, emphasizing that mental health can’t be separated from physical performance.

Crucially, however:

She has not publicly repeated or responded to Kirk’s phrase “shame to the country” in a formal speech with the dramatic confession of pain quoted in some tellings.
There is no reliable evidence that she wrote a response or “blog” after his death (in 2025) saying, “I am not a national shame,” or the specific narrative that she “broke her silence” in some large public event in response to his passing.

Thus, while much of the emotional impact of Kirk’s comments lived with her and she has acknowledged their effect, the highly-specific dramatic “speech breaking her silence” as described in the prompt is not verified by trustworthy sources.

Part III: Misinformation, Memory, and Mythmaking

Some of the narrative that has proliferated appears to be a mix of fact, emotional truth, and fabrication. In recent years, particularly after Charlie Kirk’s death in September 2025, social media has been flooded with posts claiming that Biles finally responded in a direct public way about being called a “national shame,” that she released a blog, or that she made a speech at a mental health event quoting those words exactly in front of an audience. These claims are false or not substantiated.

These fake stories tap into pre-existing emotional narratives: people remember Kirk’s words, people empathize with Biles, and they want closure. Misinformation often fills the gap, offering a more dramatic version of events than what is documented. The danger is that myths can become accepted as truth if repeated enough.

Part IV: Impact on Simone Biles, on Athletes, and Public Discourse

Even without the later dramatic speech, the fallout of Kirk’s words and Biles’ original decision has been significant.

Personal toll on Biles. While Biles has not publicly stated that she internalized Kirk’s exact words on a speech stage, media reporting, interviews, and accounts suggest she experienced psychological distress. Withdrawing from competition under intense pressure, being harshly criticized, and living with external expectations are all documented.
A shift in how athletes are viewed. Biles’ withdrawal prompted widespread conversations about mental health in sports. Support came from fellow athletes, sports organizations, commentators, and many fans. Terms such as bravery and vulnerability became central to how people discussed not just athletes but public figures more generally.
Polarization. The event revealed sharp divides. Some saw Biles’ action as failure; others saw it as strength. Kirk’s criticism resonated with those who believe strength means never stepping back; others saw his remarks as insensitive or even cruel.
Moral and cultural questions. What do we owe to those in the public eye? Do we expect them to sacrifice their mental health? Is patriotism tied to performance? How do notions of masculinity, duty, race, and expectations play into who gets criticized and who gets empathy?

Part V: What We Still Don’t Know—and What Should Be Asked

Has Simone Biles ever directly addressed, in public speech or statement, the specific words “national shame” as used by Kirk, in the way many viral posts claim? So far, no credible evidence supports that she has.
How much did those criticisms affect her long-term mental health and performance, beyond what she has shared?
What responsibility do media platforms, commentators, and political figures have when they criticize individuals dealing with mental health issues?
How do false stories (blog posts, speeches, etc.) alter public perception of real harm? When myths fill in the gaps, do they help heal, or do they risk trivializing real suffering?

Conclusion

Simone Biles’ withdrawal from the Tokyo Olympics was real. Charlie Kirk’s criticism was real. Biles has since become a leading figure in conversations around mental health, suffering, vulnerability, and strength. What is not real—or at least not substantiated—is the dramatic “breaking of her silence” speech as some accounts describe it, and certain claims about her response after Kirk’s death.

Ultimately, the story teaches us that courage is more than medals. It’s not always the flips, landings, or routines that define greatness—but also the choices we make for our own humanity. And it shows how powerful words can be, not only in their initial utterance, but in how they echo, reshape narratives, and sometimes become something different from what was actually said.

In the end, perhaps the greatest tribute to Biles isn’t a single moment of triumph over criticism, but the ongoing transformation: from seeing athletes as machines to seeing them as full human beings, worthy of empathy, respect, and mental health.