Because she is a woman, right?

H/T to daughter Jaime who told me about this earlier this week when we had dinner.

What if Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Had Swapped Genders?

A restaging of the presidential debates with an actress playing Trump and an actor playing Clinton yielded surprising results.

After watching the second televised debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in October 2016—a battle between the first female candidate nominated by a major party and an opponent who’d just been caught on tape bragging about sexually assaulting women—Maria Guadalupe, an associate professor of economics and political science at INSEAD, had an idea. Millions had tuned in to watch a man face off against a woman for the first set of co-ed presidential debates in American history. But how would their perceptions change, she wondered, if the genders of the candidates were switched? She pictured an actress playing Trump, replicating his words, gestures, body language, and tone verbatim, while an actor took on Clinton’s role in the same way. What would the experiment reveal about male and female communication styles, and the differing standards by which we unconsciously judge them?

Here is a sample of the result:

Read the whole thing. It’s very informative.


8 thoughts on “Because she is a woman, right?

  1. I forget the name of the book now, but the author described a situation in which the man had multiple female sex partners without any commitment beyond what was necessary to bed them, and his aside to the reader was something like, “you’re thinking, ‘how terrible and sexist of that man’, but if I say it about a woman, your response is ‘you go girl!'”.

    • Of course, all that’s necessary for a woman to bed a man is to be available, generally speaking. Breathing is usually desirable, too… at least for a significant majority of humanoids. But you get my point: sperm is cheap, eggs are valuable, so the equation balances differently.

  2. I saw this yesterday. I saw it as “yeah, even as a woman trump is more likable and honest sounding, and as a guy Hillary is not just smarmy and shrill, she’s just… off. Unnatural and plastic, insincere.” But I also thought it would make Dems see them rather differently, as it apparently did.

    • Yes. The old game of “what would this be like if the ___ were reversed (race, generally, but very tellingly, sex from this example) can be a real eye-opener if it can be done right and not just as an abstract thought experiment. I wonder if any of this can be had as a DVD, for distribution to die-hard leftists, or if it’s now going to slip from awareness and become only a myth — or is there a way to use this to select the next statist “Manchurian Candidate”?

      • Yes, reversing roles can be very interesting, e.g. “White Man’s Burden” with Travolta and Belafonte.

        I’d bet this simulation will be intensively studied by political operatives and debate coaches to learn what techniques are likely to work well for different sort of candidates. It might even force some of them to recognize that men and women are different, and even leftists treat and perceive them differently. The blind-spots are huge.

  3. When I first heard about this I was surprised by the fact that leftists were surprized. NO ONE but a leftist would be surprized at the results.

    The rest of us have known for generations now, that the left uses gender and race, et al, to gain advantage, that their claims of sexism and racism, et al, have the sole purpose of getting them places where principles, ideology, meaning and merit cannot.

    For example, a woman blogger can go on and on about her aches and pains, or about jogging that morning, the leaking kitchen sink faucet and the sandwich she ate that afternoon, and she’ll get a ton of comments (all from men). A man does that and he’ll be seen as shallow and bereft, which of course he is.

    The fact that we’ll readily, and sometimes even eagerly, put up with things from women and minorities that we’d never tolerate from a white man should be blatantly obvious. It also proves the lie which says America is a racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. country that leftists want us to believe. Or rather if it is a racist sexist et al country, it is the left that makes it so, and it always has been.

    At one time we didn’t call them “the left”. We called them “Confederates”.

    They’ve fallen for their own lies, apparently, and they’re the only ones who believe them. It’s like all their guns have backfired. They’ve shot themselves with their own weapons, and they just keep firing.

    “…we can start to get at how all of these nonverbal elements, which are undetectable in real time, contribute to the message that we receive when we watch these things. This has really emerged for us as a tool that could be quite powerful, and I would love for people beyond the liberal, academic audience to get to experience it too. “

    Keep it up, you sociopaths. Pay attention to EVERYTHING BUT the meaning. Ignore the meaning, concentrate on the peripheral nonsense, and you’ll continue to be surprized and confused. Forever.

    You see; some of us have become accustomed to FILTERING OUT ALL THAT HORSESHIT in an attempt to find the meaning (if any) in what’s being said. Too often there is very little meaning, and that little tidbit might be saying “Fundamental Transformation” and we know, instantly, that coming from an anti-American raised by communist parents and having taught Saul Alinsky at university, that “Transformation” cannot be a good thing.

    But you just keep concentrating on the body language, the colors, the gender, the gesticulations and the vocal inflections. You sorry, pathetic sacks of shit. Can’t you see that THAT is a big part of your problem, right there?

    • No. They can’t see it. Because to admit it is to admit that their entire ideology, their worldview, the very way the perceive the world, is entirely and irretrievably fucked up. They would be admitting they cannot compete on merit, that people are not all equal, not all cultures are equal, not all groups of people are equal, that difference exists, that objective truth exists, that good and evil might also exist.

      So no, they can’t admit it without a major, soul-shattering level of cognitive disruption.

  4. How did that song about Hillary go again?

    “And the most she will do is throw shadows at you,
    But she’s always a woman to me.”

Comments are closed.