Research Paper on Gender Discourse in the US Presidential Debates of 2016: Power and Identity

Introduction

Gender discourse is an interface that focuses on the differences and diversities that exists between males and females in a society that perceives and shapes the sexes in unique ways. It involves examining sexuality, parenthood, media, and education. Traditionally, men and women are expected to hold different social positions and each is expected to fulfill the conventional responsibilities despite the position of power and identity in the society (Lazar 37). Long-standing assumptions and concepts that have been generally accepted as right regarding gender issues have judged the actions and decisions of males and females as either right or wrong. The assumptions have them affected all sectors in a country including political and economic decisions (Van Dijk 9). Gender discourse in the political activities of the United States of America has been evident, with the last presidential debates that took place in 2016 portraying the differences between male and female candidates in the control of power and authority, and in the implications of identity. Historically, America has always been led by male presidents and the interest of a female to secure the most influential seat in the country that represents power and authority, not only in the country but in the world, was a new concept. The political culture, although advanced and accommodative of female party leaders, was unprepared for the leadership of a woman as a president (Lazar 34). The power structures that have been created over the years have remained unchallenged and unchanged, making it seem easily acceptable that a female president cannot rule the country. This paper will focus on gender discourse and focus on the Presidential Debate between the two presidential candidates in 2016, Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump. It will highlight how power and identity were displayed in the debate during the interplay of males and females.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Gender discourse was evident in the 2016 Presidential Debate when the power came into play between the two candidates. Clinton was the State Secretary at the time she showed interest in becoming the president, while Trump was s renowned businessperson, who had had no interest in politics in the past. At some point during the debate, Trump addresses his opponent by her title, Secretary Clinton, indicating that he recognizes she holds a superior position in the country (Fina 11). She deserved to be addressed by her political position name. On the other hand, Clinton constantly and consistently referred to her opponent by his first name, Donald. Positions that people occupy in the society have a direct influence and effect on the character and behavior, as well as the interactions that a person holds with others. Gender discourse is reproduced in the natural interactions between people, some which are unintentional, while some are intentionally calculated and premeditated (Van Dijk 29). Like most societies, America adopts a hierarchical structure in leadership, which then describes the direction and locus of power. Clinton, in addressing her opponent Trump with his first name and failing to acknowledge his titles, was indirectly affirming and reinforcing herself as an equal but dominant candidate for the presidency. Her past political influence was brought in the picture through her description of her achievements, which then helped the direction in which the interaction between her and Trump took. It was an opportunity for Clinton to display her power both explicitly and implicitly and position herself as the best between the two competitors.

Trump might have addressed Clinton as the Secretary as a way to confirm her acknowledged that she had some form of authority over him, and in the sense, was laying aside personal differences and according her respect. One of the most interesting insights about the interactions between Clinton and Trump during the 2016 Presidential Debate was that each party avoided the possibility of a conflict arising due to the different authority that each commanded at that point. The agenda for the day was a debate that would convince the voters on the viability and reliability of either candidate (Arnold and Dominique 67). In addition, control of the direction the debate would take was not within the power or control of ether parties, which increased the level of equality.

Gender discourse highlight some of the assumptions and precepts that have been set implicitly in the social interactions on the relationship between males and females as could be seen in the 2016 Presidential Debate. Interruptions between Trump and Clinton during the debate rampant. A person in power is excused for interrupting another individual and his or her actions justified on the virtue that the leader has an important message that necessitated the interjections. For instance, at the beginning of the debate (Lazar 34). Trump interrupted Clinton as she talked by blurting out that her statements were untrue. Clinton might have engaged the audience and stated the truth in her defense, meaning that Trump's interjections were unnecessary. The political culture has accommodated the issue of constant interruptions mid-sentence, meaning that the gender discourse concept of a make bullying a female candidate would not be taken seriously, as it would be generally accepted as a normal precept (Enli 56). Clinton, aware of the gender discourse was adamant and rarely allowed her opponent, Trump, to prevent her from making or finishing the point she wanted to pass across. The political and institutional status quo that elevates men, allowing them to take women for granted has been there for ages, but individuals who recognize that it should not be upheld rarely lets such instances affect them (Lazar 32). For instance, the constant interjections from Trump to Clinton could be interpreted as a form of bullying since he rarely allowed her to finish her sentences.

On the other hand, Clinton, in her fight for recognition as an equal party was also interrupting Trump both directly and indirectly. For instance, her non-verbal communication cues like rolling her eyes at what Trump mentioned waving her hands to request for a chance to be given permission to talk. However, because Clinton is a woman, and societal assumptions imply that females are talkative, she might have been excused for her behavior. The disparity between the interpretations perceived on the actions of each individual sheds light on the different explanations given to justify the behavior of both genders (Van Dijk 19). Gender discourse highlights the structures in society that have remained unchanged, and which continue to control the lives of human beings. Both Trump and Clinton understood the importance of waiting for their respective time to object what the other stated by adhering to the hierarchies in power.

Gender discourse bordering on identity was evident in the 2016 Presidential Debates between Clinton and Trump. Each candidate represented a different ideology due to the various political parties. One was a Democrat while the other was a Republican. Their ability to convince the voters depended on their performance at the debate, which would influence the decisions individuals made on the official voting day. In most traditions, males are perceived to be the head of families, a responsibility they undertake with ease (Lazar 187). Politically, it has also been considered that male candidates make better leaders while the women do well in administrative or supportive roles. This gender relation positions each sex in different capacities, meaning that it is unwelcome for either males or females to take up the responsibility of the other. Old identities that dictated the relationships between people in the past are felt in the modern day, meaning that despite the changes in a country and modernity, the society is still operating under the social rules that distinguish both males and females as unique sexes, with each having specific responsibilities and roles that the other is not supposed to perform.

Women take up job positions that were traditionally perceived to belong to men in different capacities like in politics and in the workplaces, but the concept of equality has not been fully embraced by all individuals. Such ideologies have brought ambiguity and misunderstandings to a large extent making the male gender dominate the political activities. men have felt entitled to lead at the expense of women, who also possess similar qualities and experiences (Lazar 184). The 2016 Presidential Debate was a platform to position both the male and female candidate as equals in the voters' eyes by testing the intellectual capacity of each person as opposed to making a pre-judgment about the ability of either based on their sex. For instance, it would be wrong to assume that Trump would make a better president than Clinton because he was a man.

In the modern day, gender discourse is indirectly portrayed during political events where men perceive themselves as better candidates for leadership positions than women (Wodak 12). For instance, during the debate, Trump commented that his opponent, Clinton, did not have the 'presidential look' since she did not have the stamina. The sexist statement is an indirect justification why he would make a better president than Clinton since he was male. According to Trump's statement, he assumed that women would not survive and meet the demands of the presidential responsibilities that require a leader to constantly travel or make both major and minor decisions. The verbal and gender attack was publicly made, and due to the social impartiality and imbalance, Trump was not made to apologize or explain what he meant by his statements (Darwish, Walid, and Tahar 122). This made him get away with the sexist statement despite using trivial words that would not only affect the 2016 Presidential Elections but would have a direct impact on the political history of the United States. It would be hard for a female candidate to affirm her stand and dedication to her ambition of becoming a president without being assumed that she would not have the 'stamina' to maintain that position (Carroll and Richard 37). This approach also affirms the cultural interpretation and manifestation towards men and women. The identities given to women is problematic and brings about an imbalance in political activities.

The statement that a female candidate would not have the stamina to handle the responsibilities of being a president can be examined from a gender discourse perceptive to reveal the imbalance between the traditional and modern roles of women. Traditionally, women's identities are revealed and seen in their ability to build and manage their homes, while in the modern day where they have managed to penetrate the corporate world, they are expected to hold junior positions or offer support to their male counterparts (Lazar 187). Gender identity and politics for women requires much dedication and commitment as well as internal confidence from a person who is willing to hear and see a partial treatment on herself because she is female. For instance, Clinton understood Trump's statements and retaliated by affirming that her position as the State Secretary had exposed her to more political responsibilities which made her travel and engage in various activities that left her physically fatigued, meaning that she had the 'stamina' and strength to manage a presidential position (Fuchsman 292; Lussenhop). The danger of words intentionally and unintentionally degrading females in the political scenes are generally accepted with those that utter such words feeling entitled to their statements. Women have downplayed the gender discourse impartiality through positioning themselves politically as equal candidate...