The point of the experiment was to see how an audience perceived the debate when the genders were swapped and everything else kept the same, same words, same tone, same mannerisms. They gave audiences a survey before the show asking their thoughts on the real debate then another survey after the show. It turns out that many people who thought Hillary easily won the real debate actually sided with the "female Trump" in this portrayal. They plan on using the results of this to discuss the effects of gender in people's perception of events.
Money Quote from the NYU.
[quote]
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.
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.
[/quote]
https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2017/march/trump-clinton-debates-gender-reversal.html
-
What if he was male?