Yatogami Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I found this interesting article, thought you guys might like it. "We both thought that the inversion would confirm our liberal assumption—that no one would have accepted Trump’s behavior from a woman, and that the male Clinton would seem like the much stronger candidate. But we kept checking in with each other and realized that this disruption—a major change in perception—was happening. I had an unsettled feeling the whole way through. We heard a lot of “now I understand how this happened”—meaning how Trump won the election. People got upset. The simplicity of Trump’s message became easier for people to hear when it was coming from a woman—that was a theme. One person said, “I’m just so struck by how precise Trump’s technique is.” Another—a musical theater composer, actually—said that Trump created “hummable lyrics,” while Clinton talked a lot, and everything she was was true and factual, but there was no “hook” to it. Someone said that Jonathan Gordon [the male Hillary Clinton] was “really punchable” because of all the smiling. And a lot of people were just very surprised by the way it upended their expectations about what they thought they would feel or experience. There was someone who described Brenda King [the female Donald Trump] as his Jewish aunt who would take care of him, even though he might not like his aunt. Someone else described her as the middle school principal who you don’t like, but you know is doing good things for you. Many were shocked to find that they couldn’t seem to find in Jonathan Gordon what they had admired in Hillary Clinton—or that Brenda King’s clever tactics seemed to shine in moments where they’d 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." Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I saw that and it's...thought provoking in a good way. Doesn't change the fact that Trump is still scaring the hell out of me now but at least I understand this a bit better now. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I don't get it. Link to post Share on other sites
Fox6 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 It surprises me that people think Hillary lost because of sexism. Hillary only got that far because she was a woman, being the first female president was her only appeal. If you exclude that, what's left of Hillary is a weak candidate with a questionable past. Trump may sound like a maniac, but let's face it, a lot of people think like him. Plus US love hysterical celebrities. Link to post Share on other sites
Cimmerian Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 This was very interesting! I hope they do manage to get their excerpts recorded and make them widely available so that a larger audience can see them. I particularly liked the clip included with the role-reversal, it was illustrative and a great idea. It seemed to show off the points about each candidate that seemed to be making impressions on voters that they couldn't always find the words to describe. Link to post Share on other sites
SithLord Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Honestly if Trump was female people wouldn't've voted for him. He interrupted so many people that people would've called him catty and bitchy and bossy. Also, I think male Clinton would've been better because there were way too many questions that boiled down to "Why should we vote for you?" and her answer was too often "Because I'm a woman." Link to post Share on other sites
Perissodactyla Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Vladimir Putin...BADASS! Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, euco said: Vladimir Putin...BADASS! How is this at all relevant? Link to post Share on other sites
SithAzathoth WinterDragon Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 It would be very interesting if it happened, most likely Trump would not have been voted for and how he thinks might be different from how he sees things now. Clinton, might be the same probably. Even with past health issues, Clinton might still have the same health problems now if she were male. Link to post Share on other sites
Skycaptain Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 If DT was female the only difference is that a certain four letter epithet would be factually correct Link to post Share on other sites
Chihiro Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I don't think that the majority of people who voted for Trump, would not have voted for him if he had been a female. For example, accusation that he has sexually assaulted women Regardless of whether its true or not, society overlooks such accusations because 'Boys will be boys'. But if he had been a woman, he wouldn't have been excused. Also, I am not sure if society would have looked at 'Rich woman' positively. (I often get the feeling that Trump's daughter doesn't get the kind of enthusiastic support her father gets) Personally, I never watched debates because I found both candidates annoying or un-charming. I just read what they said on the news. In this re-enactment, I found male Hillary a lot better than female Hillary. Link to post Share on other sites
Someone Else Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 It's relevant to imagine whether or not Trump's brash attitude would have worked for a woman. I bet it wouldn't have worked as well in some cases. And some of the things that people hated Hillary for were things that countless politicians have done and are doing, but she's taking a huge, huge rap for it while most other politicians (email shenanigans, etc) are able to stay mostly under the radar or are apathetically forgiven for it, or can shout "fake news." It's strange that she's done a few things that led to crazed rage, but only when she did it. I could pull up a list of politicians who have done the same thing with their emails and hell if people are going to get as mad at them as they did when Hillary did it. Trump could have "done a Benghazi" and many his followers would react completely differently than they would to Hillary. Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 [deleted] Link to post Share on other sites
The Terrible Travis Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Am I the only one that doesn't find any difference between the two? My reactions and thoughts on this are the exact same as my initial ones in the actual debate. Link to post Share on other sites
Cimmerian Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 I thought the male "Clinton" came off weaker than Clinton herself and actually disliked the argument style more from the male Clinton than when I saw Clinton in the debates. Conversely, I quite liked the strength and directness on the female "Trump" more than I expected to; it came across as refreshing to me. But then again, I like blunt, straight-forward women who come across as honest. Link to post Share on other sites
Fox6 Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 19 hours ago, Someone Else said: And some of the things that people hated Hillary for were things that countless politicians have done and are doing, but she's taking a huge, huge rap for it while most other politicians (email shenanigans, etc) are able to stay mostly under the radar or are apathetically forgiven for it, or can shout "fake news." It's strange that she's done a few things that led to crazed rage, but only when she did it. I could pull up a list of politicians who have done the same thing with their emails and hell if people are going to get as mad at them as they did when Hillary did it. Trump based his campaign on the fact that he's not a politician, at a time which the consensus among the public is that traditional politicians are hideous. That why Hillary's past hit so hard. 19 hours ago, Someone Else said: Trump could have "done a Benghazi" and many his followers would react completely differently than they would to Hillary. Hillary is the type of politicians that wants to appeal to everyone and not offend any group. However that also means she will face backlash if she says anything slightly controversial. Unlike Trump, since his voters don't care about flaws in his speech. Link to post Share on other sites
Artistofnoname Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 It would have made no difference. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest And Peggy Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 23 hours ago, CaptainYesterday said: Hillary Clinton is rich. not as rich as Trump, though Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 [deleted] Link to post Share on other sites
Skycaptain Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Billary Clinton? Link to post Share on other sites
Ashes Floating Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 If a female Trump had assaulted women, they wouldn't have made it into office, because not enough people would vote for a lesbian candidate, sadly. Link to post Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 [deleted] Link to post Share on other sites
ChillaKilla Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Yeah, I'm sure he asked explicit permission before grabbing women by their crotches and saying "since you're rich you can do anything and they'll let you" Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted April 18, 2017 Author Share Posted April 18, 2017 Just now, ChillaKilla said: Yeah, I'm sure he asked explicit permission before grabbing women by their crotches and saying "since you're rich you can do anything and they'll let you" Remember what I said about words =/= violence? This is a perfect example. Trump didn't assault anyone. Saying otherwise is a just a conspiracy, and not fact. Link to post Share on other sites
ChillaKilla Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 Just now, スバル said: Remember what I said about words =/= violence? This is a perfect example. Trump didn't assault anyone. Saying otherwise is a just a conspiracy, and not fact. He ADMITTED to it. If there's a conspiracy, HE is responsible for it. Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted April 18, 2017 Author Share Posted April 18, 2017 1 minute ago, ChillaKilla said: He ADMITTED to it. If there's a conspiracy, HE is responsible for it. Then were is the conviction? This took place over a decade(s) ago. Where were the women he assaulted apparently? Link to post Share on other sites
ChillaKilla Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 1 minute ago, スバル said: Then were is the conviction? This took place over a decade(s) ago. Where were the women he assaulted apparently? So if you aren't convicted then you didn't commit any crime? People get away with assault daily. You cannot say that just because a pervert on a train didn't go through the legal system that he didn't really grab someone inappropriately, especially if there were witnesses. Lack of conviction doesn't mean they're innocent, it can also mean they got away with it. Link to post Share on other sites
ChillaKilla Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 The allegations: http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/10/all-the-women-accusing-trump-of-rape-sexual-assault.html Link to post Share on other sites
Yatogami Posted April 18, 2017 Author Share Posted April 18, 2017 Just now, ChillaKilla said: So if you aren't convicted then you didn't commit any crime? People get away with assault daily. You cannot say that just because a pervert on a train didn't go through the legal system that he didn't really grab someone inappropriately, especially if there were witnesses. Lack of conviction doesn't mean they're innocent, it can also mean they got away with it. No, because I believe in Innocent until proven guilty. I don't witchhunt people, because I "feel" they are bad. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.