Cover not available
Article published In:
Language and Dialogue
Vol. 7:2 (2017) ► pp.189–212

Gender role reversal in political debate?

French politicians’ verbal and para-verbal strategies during the socialist primaries

| University of Cyprus,
| University of Lorraine (France),
Focusing on the Aubry – Hollande debate that took place in the context of the 2011 French socialist party primaries, we observe a possible reversal of gender stereotypes and examine word choices as well as more subtle cues such as interruptions, hedges, etc. If the debate could be described as a stereotypical gender role-reversal, we suggest that these cues point to a more complex picture than a gender reversal, and that the pragmatics structuring the dialogue might be interpreted as a pattern of challenger/champion. Moreover contrasting press articles and comment in online forums on the same debate we invoke a ‘peri-performativity concept’ to explain the differences in interpretations of the politicians’ performances, and conclude that perlocutionary dimensions can be reinterpreted by dominant discourses, (de)/(re)-constructing the performativity of speech acts.
Keywords: Martine Aubry, François Hollande, media role, gendered leadership, paraverbal cues, verbal cues, performativity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Is leadership gendered?
    • 2.1Macro, meso and micro-level of analysis
    • 2.2Women politicians: The lack of fit and overcoming it
    • 2.3Building a relational leadership, constructing a political ethos
  • 3.Representations, discourse and strategies in the socialist debate
    • 3.1Symbolic representations in the political field
    • 3.2The structural powers during the socialist campaign
  • 4.The micro level: Linguistic and para-verbal choices during the debate
    • 4.1The linguistic choices: Opposite rhetorical strategies
      • 4.1.1Core-left vs center-right positioning
      • 4.1.2Qualifying one’s speech
    • 4.2The para-verbal and non-verbal cues
      • 4.2.1Smiling
      • 4.2.2Body posture and gaze
    • 4.3Turns, interruptions, formulaic answers
  • 5.Peri-performativity, media and followers
    • 5.1The perlocutionary force and the media
    • 5.2The perlocutionary force and the forum participants
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 27 October 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.7.2.03bai
References (59)
References
Achin, Catherine and Marion Paloetti. 2002. “Le “salto” du stigmate. Genre et construction des listes aux municipales de 2001.” Politix: La parité en pratiques 15(60): 33–54.. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Achin, Catherine, Lucie Bargel, Delphine Dulong, Eric Fassin. 2007. Sexes genre et politique. Paris: Economica.Google Scholar
Achin, Catherine. 2012. “Au-delà de la parité.” Mouvements 69(1): 49–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Achin, Catherine and Elsa Dorlin. 2008. “Nicolas Sarkozy ou la masculinité mascarade du Président.” Raisons politiques 3(31): 19–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Achin, Catherine and Sandrine Levêque. 2012. “Femmes et hommes en politique : comprendre la différence…” Available at [URL] (accessed 27.01.15).
Allan, Claire and Céline Mas. 2007. Femmes et politique. Paris: Ellipses.Google Scholar
Anthias, Floya. 2012. “Hierarchies of social location, class and intersectionality: Towards a translocational frame.” International Sociology 28(1): 121–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baider, Fabienne. 2010. “Ségolène Royal dans la presse française: Deuxième sexe, ou second choix?” Modern and Contemporary France Journal 18(4): 475–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Hybrid Strategic Identities as Gendered Resources in French Politics (Martine Aubry and Marine Le Pen).” Communication Papers 3(5): 91–102.Google Scholar
. 2015. “Evaluation de la présidentiabilité.” Mots. Les langages du politique 1081: 103–128.Google Scholar
Béchet, Marion, Marion Sandré, Fabrice Hirsch, Arnaud Richard, Fabrice Marsac and Rudolph Sock. 2013. “De l’utilisation de la pause silencieuse dans le débat politique télévisé. Le cas de François Hollande.” Mots. Les Langages du politique 1031: 23–38.Google Scholar
Bertini, Marie-Joseph. 2002. Femmes, le Pouvoir impossible. Paris: Pauvert.Google Scholar
Briton, Nancy J. and Judith A. Hall. 1995. “Beliefs about female and male nonverbal communication.” Sex Roles 321: 79–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butler, Judith. 1995. Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carroll, Susan J. 1994. Women as Candidates in American Politics. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Clifton, Jonathan. 2012. “A discursive approach to leadership.” Journal of Business Communication 49(2): 148–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulomb-Gully, Marlène. 2009. “Le corps présidentiel. Représentation politique et incarnation dans la campagne présidentielle française de 2007.” Mots. Le langage du politique 1(89): 25–38.Google Scholar
. 2012. Présidente: le grand défi. Femmes, politique et médias. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1994. “Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color.” In The Public Nature of Private Violence, ed. by M. Fineman and R. Mykitiuk, 93–118. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Eagly, Alice H. and Steven J. Karau. 2002. “Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.” Psychological Review 1091: 573–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eagly, Alice H. 2005. “Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender matter?” The Leadership Quarterly 161: 459–474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekman, Paul and Wallace V. Friesen. 1969. “The repertoire, or non-verbal behavior: categories, origins, usage and coding.” Semiotica 11: 49–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1982. “Felt, false, and miserable smiles.” Journal of non-verbal behavior 6 (4): 238–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis. Boston: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Fairhurst, Gail and Stacey L. Connaughton. 2014. “Leadership: A communicative perspective.” Leadership 101: 7–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freedman, Jane. 1997. Femmes politiques: mythes et symboles. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Garcin-Marrou, Isabelle. 2009. “Ségolène Royal ou le difficile accès au panthéon politique.” Mots. Les langages du politique 2(90): 13–28.Google Scholar
Gardiner, Rita. 2015. Gender, Authenticity and Leadership: Thinking with Arendt. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gee, James Paul. 2011. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gidengil, Elizabeth and Joanna Everitt. 2003. “Conventional coverage/ unconventional politicians: gender and media coverage of Canadian leaders’ debates, 1993, 1997, 2000.” Canadian Journal of Political Science/ Revue canadienne de science politique 36(3): 559–577. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gingras, Anne-Marie. 2015. Genre et Politique dans la presse en France et au Canada. Québec: Presse Universitaire Québec.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1977. “The arrangement between the sexes.” Theory and Society 4(3): 301–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, Judith A. and Amy Gene Halberstadt. 1986. “Smiling and gazing.” In The Psychology of Gender: Advances through Meta-analysis, ed. by J. S. Hyde and M. C. Inn, 136–185. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Heilman, Madeline E. 2001. “Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder.” Journal of Social Issues 571: 657–674. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrnson, Paul S. and Jennifer C. Lucas. 2006. “The Fairer Sex? Gender and Negative Campaigning in US Elections.” American Politics Research 34 (1): 69–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosking, Dian Mary. 2006. “Not leaders not followers. A postmodern discourse of leadership Processes.” In Follower-centered Perspectives on Leadership: A Tribute to the Memory of James R. Meindl, ed. by B. Shamir, R. Pillai, M. Bligh and M. Uhl-Bien, 243–263. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Huffaker, David. 2010. “Dimensions of leadership and social influence in online communities.” Human Communication Research 36(4): 593–617. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Juven, Philippe and Jean-Marc Coletta. 2002. “Peut-on parler de gestualité” LIDIL 261: 177–188.Google Scholar
Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman. New York: Columbia.Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orrechioni Catherine. 1900. Les interactions verbales. Paris: A. Colin.Google Scholar
Kern, Montague and Edley P. Paige. 1994. “Women candidates going public: the 30 second-format.” Argumentation & Advocacy 31 (2): 80–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaFrance, Marianne, Levy E. Paluck and Marvin A. Hecht. 2003. “The Contingent Smile: A Meta-Analysis of Sex Differences in Smiling.” Psychological Bulletin 129 (2): 305–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaFrance, Marianne and Marvin A. Hecht. 1999. “Obliged to smile: The effect of power and gender on facial expression.” In The Social Context of Nonverbal Behavior, ed. by P. Philippot, R. S. Feldman and E. J. Coats, 45–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin. 1977. “What you can do with words: Politeness, pragmatics and performatives.” In Proceedings of the Texas Conference on Performatives, Presuppositions and Implicatures, ed. by R. Rogers, R. Wall andJ. Murphy, 79–106. Arlington: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Le Bart, Christian. 2009. “Les présidentiables de 2007 entre proximité et surplomb. Nicolas Sarkozy et Ségolène Royal vus pas Libération.” Mots. Les langages du politique 891: 31–45.Google Scholar
Melville, Herman. [1852] 1949. Pierre: Or the Ambiguities. New York: Hendricks House.Google Scholar
Millar, Sharon. 2015. “Pronominal use and leadership in the discourse of Helle Thorning-Schmidt.” In Discourse, Politics and Women as Global Leaders, ed. by John Wilson and Diana Boxer, 67–90. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moore, Jo Ellen. 1997. “Content analysis in leadership research: Examples, procedures, and suggestions for future use.” The Leadership Quarterly 8(1): 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murray, Robin. 2014. “Quotas for Men: Reframing Gender Quotas as a Means of Improving Representation for All.” American Political Science Review 108(3): 520–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandré, Marion. 2009. “Analyse d’un dysfonctionnement interactionnel – l’interruption – dans le débat de l’entre-deux-tours de l’élection présidentielle de 2007.” Mots 891: 69–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. “Mimiques et politique : analyse des rires et sourires dans le débat télévisé.” Mots 961: 13–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. 2003. Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity. Durham/ London: Duke University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sineau, Mariette. 2001. Femmes et pouvoir sous la Ve République. De l’exclusion à l’entrée dans la course présidentielle. Paris: Les Presses de Sciences Po.Google Scholar
. 2007. “Effets de genre, effets de génération ? Le vote hommes/femmes à l’élection présidentielle 2007.” Revue française de science politique 3(57): 353–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith-Lovin, Lynn and Dawn Robinson. 1992. “Gender and Conversational Dynamics.” In Gender, Interaction and Inequality, ed. by Cecilia L. Ridgeway, 122–57. New York: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trognon, Alain and Janine Larrue. 1994. Pragmatique du discours politique. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Verloo, Mieke. 2006. “Multiple inequalities, intersectionality and the European Union.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 13(3): 211–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
West, Candace and Don H. Zimmerman. 1987. “Doing gender.” Gender and Society 1(2): 125–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winker, Gabriele and Nina Degele. 2011. “Intersectionality as multi-level analysis: Dealing with social inequality.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 18(1): 51–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar