Assuming Kamala Harris doesn't back out, a debate between her and Donald Trump is set to take place in nine days. While I’m not entirely convinced Kamala will show up, some are already suggesting that Trump needs to pull his punches and avoid coming across as too aggressive.
Wilbur Ross, who served as Donald Trump's secretary of Commerce, is cautioning former President Trump against coming off as too "big and strong" in the debate with Kamala.
“The only danger is Trump being big and strong and a man,” Ross told radio host John Catsimatidis on "The Cats Roundtable" on 77 WABC.
“He has to be careful not to be seen as piling on a woman," he added. "People don’t like to see a woman pushed too hard."
Ross is hardly the only person who has warned that Trump has to tread lightly in how he handles Kamala Harris on the debate stage. And that's just ridiculous. I'm sorry, but why is there this double standard? Is Kamala Harris going to pull any punches with Trump if she decides to show up? Of course not. So why should he?
Related: Is Kamala Worried About Losing Another Blue State?
I really hate the suggestion that Trump should tread lightly when debating Harris. I can't be the only one who thinks this perpetuates the patronizing notion that women are somehow less capable of handling tough political discourse. Kamala Harris, of course, has presented herself as the tough and capable prosecutor who "knows Donald Trump's type."
If she wants us to trust her ability to handle world leaders, be they allies or enemies, she should be able to face Donald Trump without critics crying foul because Trump was too "strong" or "manly" on the debate stage.
For the most part, during a campaign, it would be sexist and misogynistic to imply that simply because of her gender, she might not be able to hold her own against a male opponent. But, it's okay as long as we're talking about when they're both on the debate stage together? Such thinking reinforces the stereotype that women are inherently more fragile or less competent in high-stakes environments like a presidential debate, which is insulting not only to Harris but to all women who strive for leadership positions.
By suggesting Trump must go easy on Harris, the underlying message is that Kamala needs special treatment—a disservice to her and to the idea of true equality. If Harris is to be taken seriously as a potential president, she should be treated as any other candidate, as someone capable of handling the heat that comes with the political arena. Sparing her from tough exchanges would not only be patronizing but also a disservice to the electorate, who deserve to see how she performs under pressure.
Of course, no matter what happens during the debate—if Kamala does show up—Trump's performance will be panned, and the media will push the narrative that his behavior was too aggressive or too masculine, and that he did something that will backfire with women voters. We know this because we saw it in 2016, when Trump faced Hillary Clinton. Then, he received criticism for his performance during the debates that he wouldn't have had his opponent been a man.
If we are to truly evaluate candidates based on their qualifications and ideas, the gender of the participants should not dictate the tone or style of the debate. There shouldn't be a double standard, especially when the media has been pumping Kamala up as a tough-as-nails prosecutor who should be able to hold her own against Trump.
If you're gonna run for the highest office in the land, you can't hide behind your gender.
