AI, Normality, and Oppressive Things (Extended Abstract)

While it is well-known that AI systems might bring about unfair social impacts by influencing social schemas, much attention has been paid to instances where the content presented by AI systems explicitly demeans marginalized groups or reinforces problematic stereotypes. This paper urges critical scrutiny to be paid to instances that shape social schemas through subtler manners. Drawing from recent philosophical discussions on the politics of artifacts, we argue that many existing AI systems should be identified as what Liao and Huebner called oppressive things when they function to manifest oppressive normality. We first categorize three different ways that AI systems could function to manifest oppressive normality and argue that those seemingly innocuous or even beneficial for the oppressed group might still be oppressive. Even though oppressiveness is a matter of degree, we further identify three features of AI systems that make their oppressive impacts more concerning. We end by discussing potential responses to oppressive AI systems and urge remedies that go beyond fixing the unjust outcomes but also challenge the unjust power hierarchies of oppression.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Published
2025-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1609/aies.v8i2.36656
Primary Topic
Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI, Normality, and Oppressive Things (Extended Abstract)

Linus Ta-Lun Huang, Ting-an Lin
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms
article

AI, Normality, and Oppressive Things (Extended Abstract)

Linus Ta-Lun Huang, Ting-an Lin
article en

Abstract

While it is well-known that AI systems might bring about unfair social impacts by influencing social schemas, much attention has been paid to instances where the content presented by AI systems explicitly demeans marginalized groups or reinforces problematic stereotypes. This paper urges critical scrutiny to be paid to instances that shape social schemas through subtler manners. Drawing from recent philosophical discussions on the politics of artifacts, we argue that many existing AI systems should be identified as what Liao and Huebner called oppressive things when they function to manifest oppressive normality. We first categorize three different ways that AI systems could function to manifest oppressive normality and argue that those seemingly innocuous or even beneficial for the oppressed group might still be oppressive. Even though oppressiveness is a matter of degree, we further identify three features of AI systems that make their oppressive impacts more concerning. We end by discussing potential responses to oppressive AI systems and urge remedies that go beyond fixing the unjust outcomes but also challenge the unjust power hierarchies of oppression.

Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and SocietyVol. 8(2)
Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

AI, Normality, and Oppressive Things (Extended Abstract) — Linus Ta-Lun Huang, Ting-an Lin · Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS