[SUBMITTED/ISSUES CONTEST] Hey Alexis, Are You Sexist?

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Fri May 14, 2021 5:02 pm

Hello, all! This is my first foray into issue authorship, inspired by a report by the Brookings Institution, and would would like to know what you all think. All feedback is appreciated (though it is a little late at this point, with the issue being submitted).

This is Draft 4.5. Taking into account recent feedback, the title was changed to reference Amazon Alexa. The description was also changed to integrate a reference to the "smash the patriarchy" meme, and removes some extraneous information. The first option now comes in two flavors: one for nations with AI citizenship, and one for nations without, and was altered to incorporate a new effect line referencing a somewhat famous commercial. Further, the adjective "god-given" was removed from the capitalist flavor of the second option, with the second option's effect line also changed, and the third option's speaker is a sexist secretary, rather than the leader's grandfather. Finally, smart quotes and apostrophes were replaced with straight quotes.

TITLE:
Hey Alexis, Are You Sexist?

VALIDITY:
Has the Internet, computers, and high scientific advancement

DESCRIPTION:
A study from the @@NAME@@ Institute of Technology claims that the usage of voice assistants, due to a combination of their servility and the fact they are typically feminine, reinforce gender bias. Arguments are being raised, and things smashed, over the study's validity and potential implications.

OPTION 1 – AI PERSONHOOD
"Are you really going to let this systemic misogyny continue, @@LEADER@@?", snaps @@RANDOMFEMALENAME_1@@, author of the study in question and proud feminist. "This study is just one of many to prove that voice assistants being female by convention renders even egalitarian users somewhat sexist. Therefore, the solution here is to let our digital citizens' diversity flourish by mandating that they are the gender, or lack thereof, they identify as."
OUTCOME:
women have never ordered more bath oil

OPTION 1 – NO AI PERSONHOOD
"Are you really going to let this systemic misogyny continue, @@LEADER@@?", snaps @@RANDOMFEMALENAME_1@@, author of the study in question and proud feminist. "This study is just one of many to prove that voice assistants being female by convention renders even egalitarian users somewhat sexist. Therefore, the solution here is to increase their diversity by mandating that half of them are male by default."
OUTCOME:
women have never ordered more bath oil

OPTION 2 -- CAPITALISM
"I don't see what the problem is here," interjects Mosfet Gatez, president of a leading @@DEMONYM@@ tech company. "I was simply fulfilling the nation's male… I mean myriad of citizens' desires! They want voice assistants to be submissive and feminine, and who am I to deny them their right to enjoy my software? Further, according to our market research, openness to trying voice assistants is correlated with openness about one's own biases, likely inflating the study's measure of users' prejudice. Simply ignore the feminists' pseudoscientific nonsense, @@LEADER@@, and let the market work its magic! Besides, I created a male version, too, though nobody seems to use it..."
OUTCOME:
@@NAME@@'s sexiest women have suddenly gained a reputation for problems with accents

OPTION 2 -- NO CAPITALISM
"I don't see what the problem is here," interjects Mosfet Gatez, Minister of the People's Technology. "We were simply fulfilling the nation's male… I mean myriad of citizens' desires! They want voice assistants to be submissive and feminine, and who are we to deny them their state-given right to enjoy our software? Further, according to our psychological research, openness to trying voice assistants is correlated with openness about one's own biases, likely inflating the study's measure of users' prejudice. Simply ignore the feminists' pseudoscientific nonsense, @@LEADER@@, and keep the people happy! Besides, we created a male version, too, though nobody seems to use it…"
OUTCOME:
@@NAME@@'s sexiest women have suddenly gained a reputation for problems with accents

OPTION 3
You hear a grumbling voice. "Why bother with these newfangled voice assistants?" asks your Luddite secretary, while attempting to hide a whip. "After all, we could just turn real women into our domestic…uhh... helpers! Send us back to the good old days by banning these soulless robots, and bring civility back to @@NAME@@!"
OUTCOME:
librarians are quitting in droves to become housewives

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Fri May 14, 2021 5:04 pm

Previous Draft Versions:

by **Laka Strolistandiler** » Sat May 15, 2021 2:02 am

Since option 1 mentions companies please limit this issue from socialist states.

by **Authoritaria-Imperia** » Sat May 15, 2021 10:28 am

I feel like this is missing the sensible female argument of "just give robots two presets: male and female" or "mandate that robots are sold in two versions: one with a male and one with a female voice". The fact that a female speaker doesn't show up 'til the third option — and then has an outrageously crazy perspective — presents a kind of unbalanced narrative against the feminists.

My suggestion would be to make that feminist argument the first option — the feminists are the ones who've initiated the debate, after all — and then do the corporate response against the feminists as #2. I think the agender-robots one would be a good third option, and then you could do one of your current last two as a fourth crazy option.
That'd be my expectation when reading the issue, anyway. There's nothing wrong with doing something else, of course — these are all suggestions — but I'd be wary of presenting an unbalanced narrative like your current draft does.

by **Trotterdam** » Sat May 15, 2021 3:05 pm

Authoritaria-Imperia wrote:I feel like this is missing the sensible female argument of "just give robots two presets: male and female" or "mandate that robots are sold in two versions: one with a male and one with a female voice".

I think most voice assistants already do that. (I don't use any personally, but at least I know that when phoning various entities I've heard "your call is important to us, please hold" type clips in both male and female voices.) However, even if the products themselves are perfectly balanced, that doesn't necessarily prevent customers from being biased in favor of choosing to use the female voice far more often than the male voice.

And I don't just mean male customers. Even heterosexual females are frequently taught to think of men as dangerous sexual predators while other women are safe people they can be friends with.

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Sat May 15, 2021 6:28 pm

Thank you all for your insights thus far. I have taken them into account to create Draft 1.5, which is up right now. Keep the feedback coming!

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Tue May 18, 2021 9:22 am

Bump.

by **Ransium** » Tue May 18, 2021 3:06 pm

I read your opening:

With relatively rapid advancements in Artificial Intelligence over the last few years, voice assistants have moved out of computer laboratories at @@NAME@@’s top universities and into @@DEMONYMPLURAL@@’ everyday lives. The problem? Feminists claim that these assistants’ typically feminine voices and names, combined with their tolerance of verbal abuse, is setting gender relations back by many years, stirring up a major controversy.

While fairly competent writing it doesn't exactly spark joy. There isn't any humor even though I think there's opportunity for it. The first sentence is background without much relevancy to the actual issue. It tells (not shows) the reader there is a problem twice (with 'The problem?' and 'stirring up a major controversy'). Either make it funnier or shorter or both.

I also don’t really care for 3. It confounds machine learning and artificial intelligence. Voice assistants are not AI just a series of cleverly cobbled together algorithms /machine learning models. I assure you they in sum have no more feelings than a bubble sort algorithm.

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Wed May 19, 2021 7:32 am

Thank you for this valuable feedback, Ransium. I have taken it into account to create draft #2, which is up now. Keep the feedback coming, everybody!

by **Ransium** » Wed May 19, 2021 8:14 pm

After exhausting their supply of men to accuse of assault (and things to smash), feminists have turned their attention to voice assistants’ typically feminine voices and names, along with their tolerance of verbal abuse, claiming that they are setting back gender relations by many years.

Well I see there’s an attempt at humor now, but I think humor that questions the validity of feminist claims comes off as biased to me. I read this opening as strongly implying that feminists are making unfounded claims which predisposes the reader against the first option. Also the beginning of the last option no longer makes sense.

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Thu May 20, 2021 12:14 pm

Man, you are quick to provide feedback! Again, thank you for your suggestions, which I have taken into account to create draft 2.5. What do you all think?

by **Fauxia** » Fri May 21, 2021 7:20 am

Hey there. Solid premise here.

Not sure about the description. Maybe it's just me but feels like it's maybe making too much light of rape. Certainly, any issue that references rape needs an adult tag.

I'm also not sure about option 3. You can have an out there option, but I'm not sure about one that is really sexist AND bans the internet at the same time. Might be a bit too much.

by **Trotterdam** » Fri May 21, 2021 11:43 am

You don't even need the internet for voice assistants, do you? I'm sure you could install those things from CD.

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Sun May 23, 2021 4:28 pm

Trotterdam wrote:You don't even need the internet for voice assistants, do you? I'm sure you could install those things from CD.

Fauxia wrote:I'm also not sure about option 3. You can have an out there option, but I'm not sure about one that is really sexist AND bans the internet at the same time. Might be a bit too much.

Good points! I will remove the last sentence of the last option, then.

Fauxia wrote:Not sure about the description. Maybe it's just me but feels like it's maybe making too much light of rape. Certainly, any issue that references rape needs an adult tag.

I will add an adult tag, but do you have any suggestions as to the introduction's first sentence? I see what you are saying about treating rape lightly, but I can't think of anything better in the way of humor.

by **Trotterdam** » Sun May 23, 2021 6:53 pm

Why does this thread keep getting bumped to the top of the forum with the "new posts" icon, but then when I open it there aren't any? Is there a forum glitch or does someone keep spamming it with posts that get removed by the moderators? Why this thread in particular?

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Mon May 24, 2021 4:15 pm

Trotterdam wrote:Why does this thread keep getting bumped to the top of the forum with the "new posts" icon, but then when I open it there aren't any? Is there a forum glitch or does someone keep spamming it with posts that get removed by the moderators? Why this thread in particular?

There are no glitches or spam behind the bumping. Rather than bumping the thread by adding messages, (which I personally feel clutter it up), I decided to delete and then repost my most recent post, making it a technically new post. I apologize for any confusion or mild annoyance this might have caused.

by **Authoritaria-Imperia** » Mon May 24, 2021 6:54 pm

Clever Homo Sapiens wrote:There are no glitches or spam behind the bumping. Rather than bumping the thread by adding messages, (which I personally feel clutter it up), I decided to delete and then repost my most recent post, making it a technically new post. I apologize for any confusion or mild annoyance this might have caused.

If you don't want to clutter the thread, I suggest you bump it less frequently — convention in the GI forum is something like "bump once it falls off the first forum page", and I don't think this one ever fell that far. (Your bumping style has been confusing for me too, as I keep expecting another post in the thread and finding nothing.)

Edit: Also, as far as advice… your title rubs me the wrong way. It seems like a reference to the #MeToo movement… except that that one's about encouraging sexual-harassment and rape victims to speak out. When you use it here, it's like you're casually lumping "robot gender inequality" in with "rape" under the general umbrella of "feminists' talking points", and sort of equating two extremely distant things. I realise that's not what you mean, but it comes off that way. The result is not only insensitive, but also biases your issue right from the start.
I'd come up with something completely different for a title.

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Tue May 25, 2021 1:03 pm

Authoritaria-Imperia wrote:If you don't want to clutter the thread, I suggest you bump it less frequently — convention in the GI forum is something like "bump once it falls off the first forum page", and I don't think this one ever fell that far. (Your bumping style has been confusing for me too, as I keep expecting another post in the thread and finding nothing.)

Thank you for the advice on the GI thread. I appreciate it!

Authoritaria-Imperia wrote:Edit: Also, as far as advice… your title rubs me the wrong way. It seems like a reference to the #MeToo movement… except that that one's about encouraging sexual-harassment and rape victims to speak out. When you use it here, it's like you're casually lumping "robot gender inequality" in with "rape" under the general umbrella of "feminists' talking points", and sort of equating two extremely distant things. I realise that's not what you mean, but it comes off that way. The result is not only insensitive, but also biases your issue right from the start.
I'd come up with something completely different for a title.

For the title, how about: "Voice Assistants Sexist, Say Feminists"?

by **Nardin** » Wed May 26, 2021 6:34 am

Clever Homo Sapiens wrote:For the title, how about: "Voice Assistants Sexist, Say Feminists"?

While that title may convey what the issue is about, I feel like it lacks either the humor or panache that makes issues stand out. Maybe something like "Voicing Your Opinion," (meh) or do a play on irl voice assistants, such as "Alexa Be Gone?" or "Siri, What is Sexism?"

These ones might not be so good, but hopefully it sparks some ideas.

by **Authoritaria-Imperia** » Wed May 26, 2021 11:54 am

Clever Homo Sapiens wrote:how about: "Voice Assistants Sexist, Say Feminists"?

It's a tried-and-true format that immediately informs readers what the Issue's about. I agree that it's not the most creative of titles, so I would keep thinking on it if I were you, but it's definitely an improvement on your current title.

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Wed May 26, 2021 12:31 pm

If you can explicitly reference IRL things in titles, then how about about: "Sexism Selling Siri?" Not very humorous, I admit, but groups of three and alliteration make everything better!

Edit: I think the usage of the word "sell" would be appropriate for both capitalist AND socialist nations, provided that one of its definitions would be to "persuade someone of the merits of," right?

by **Authoritaria-Imperia** » Wed May 26, 2021 1:08 pm

Clever Homo Sapiens wrote:If you can explicitly reference IRL things in titles, then how about about: "Sexism Selling Siri?" Not very humorous, I admit, but groups of three and alliteration make everything better!

Edit: I think the usage of the word "sell" would be appropriate for both capitalist AND socialist nations, provided that one of its definitions would be to "persuade someone of the merits of," right?

I'd be wary of referencing real products; I doubt that would fly, unfortunately. :/ However, I do think there's potential if you build in a (made-up) product name in your description; then you could reference that product name in a title pun, maybe…? Just kind of spitballing.

by **Bears Armed** » Wed May 26, 2021 1:14 pm

Authoritaria-Imperia wrote:I'd be wary of referencing real products; I doubt that would fly, unfortunately. :/ However, I do think there's potential if you build in a (made-up) product name in your description; then you could reference that product name in a title pun, maybe…?

It might be best if the made-up name was very similar to one of the RL ones, like some earlier issues use a fast-food chain called 'McRonalds'...
'Ziri', perhaps, or 'Alicia'?

by **Clever Homo Sapiens** » Wed May 26, 2021 1:53 pm

I think I got it: "Hey Ziri, Are You Sexist?"

by **Australian rePublic** » Sat May 29, 2021 4:27 am

Option 4- ha? Who uses voice assistance for looking things up? I mostly use it for hands-free operation whilst driving
"Hey Bixby- call person XYZ". How would a library replace that?

[SUBMITTED/ISSUES CONTEST] Hey Alexis, Are You Sexist?

[SUBMITTED/ISSUES CONTEST] Hey Alexis, Are You Sexist?

Who is online