Posted on 03/06/2017 9:07:44 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
After watching the second televised debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in October 2016a battle between the first female candidate nominated by a major party and an opponent whod just been caught on tape bragging about sexually assaulting womenMaria 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 Clintons 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?
(Excerpt) Read more at nyu.edu ...
Fascinating. Thank you for finding and posting it.
Very good comment, Jenny..
That was pretty damn fascinating, IMO.
I watched 5 minutes of the mock debate with the actors at NYU. They were very skillful actors, and were able to portray the gender switching quite well, I thought.
Here's my thinking:
So I came away believing (more strongly) that the gender doesn't really matter.
Curious what others thought...??
Additional background and amusing schadenfreude from viewer reactions, courtesy of the New York Times:
Glad you enjoyed it.
Once again, they continue to spread that lie. He never bragged about sexually assaulting women.
Thanks. Regarding your question, If any of them actually got “redpilled” I’d be very surprised, but voluntarily getting their own noses rubbed in exactly why they were idiots might have some future value. They’ve likely never encountered such an experience.
I came away believing that gender matters to a bizarre degree, to the left. They’ll agree with the female over the male, period. And, when subjected to role reversal with exactly the same debate points, even when including visual cues, mannerisms and verbal tone, they still dislike the male and prefer the female, to their obvious discomfort. It’s all gender all the time, nothing but gender. For the left.
Is it possible to overdose on schadenfreude?
I’m feeling a bit giddy.
;D
Many were shocked to find that they couldnt seem to find in Jonathan Gordon what they had admired in Hillary Clintonor that Brenda Kings clever tactics seemed to shine in moments where theyd remembered Donald Trump flailing or lashing out. For those Clinton voters trying to make sense of the loss, it was by turns bewildering and instructive, raising as many questions about gender performance and effects of sexism as it answered.
This is a fascinating psychological experiment. It looks like many of the liberals who attended the performance had their identity politics shaken.
No comment on this waste of digital pixels. Who would write crap like this?
Then Trump would’ve won even more bigly.
Am still chuckling over the “punchable” adjective, cited in both the original & the NYT link in #45, that one play-goer used to describe the Clinton portrayer. That smugness of one’s better (and heir to the throne by outright manipulation & calumny) in the presence of an audience of lessors could suddenly be apprehended.
As a female myself, I am freshly reminded that to about 50% of the ppl with whom I interact, I am & will forever only be an obese white middle-aged female, interchangeable & synonymous with any & every other fat white lady they run into. These folks literally think in symbols - categories of simple imagery, instead of taking each stranger as an individual. Doesn’t hurt my feelings because I don’t perceive myself as the one with the deficiency, but it’s helpful in life to understand how others interpret my presence.
Well, since humans do not have “gender” but rather sex, and since you can impersonate the opposite sex but not become it, the question is moot.
This is one of the more fascinating events I have ever read about.
“Liberals” had to go through an intensive/extensive expenditure of time/energy/labor in order to see the obvious.
In all fairness, though, they are commended for making the effort, and especially commended for actually recognizing (instantly!) that the outcome was the opposite of what they confidently expected.
What if liberals had a brain?
What if liberals had a brain?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.