Author: Ayishetu Ibrahim

Allison, Kristina, Jordan, Ayishetu, Owen 

Dr. Buolamwini is a computer scientist, digital activist, and AI researcher. Dr. Buolamwini’s work started as a journey of advocacy; however, it had unintentionally morphed into uncovering the potential harms of Olay’s Skin Advisor System. Dr. Buolamwini referenced the work of Safiya Nobel, who wrote The Algorithms of Oppression. This spotlighted how search engines portrayed Black girls and women of color in derogatory ways. In an attempt to lead to a more inclusive system, Dr. Buolamwini collaborated with Olay in a campaign to address bias in artificial intelligence used to analyze skin and provide personalized skincare recommendations. Dr. Buolamwini describes Olays original facial recognition technology that “was created and designed by one demographic, that is only mostly effective on that one demographic”. The AI is used to personalize skin care recommendations that rely on a database of facial images that lack diversity of skin tones. This caused the AI to perform improper skin care assessments for people with darker skin tones. The original goal was to take action and “address algorithmic bias: creating more inclusive datasets.” This was going to be done through a campaign known as “Selfies for Inclusion”. Having all this data seems like a wonderful thing, as it allows Olay to work toward minimizing bias. These data sets would enable the AI in Olay’s skin Advisory system to have a broader collection of data to deliver more accurate skin care recommendations. This sounds like an all wonderful idea but a new issue arises and it becomes a socio-technical problem. The data AI uses can be used for both good and bad. Who decides when the positives outweigh the negatives? This disagreement allows for inherent bias as we people tend to only focus on one side either negatives or positives. If we only focus on the negative we never get to see the full potential of benefits it can bring. It is important to not let our potential bias overshadow the positives. The journey of advocacy in Octavia Butler’s Xenogenesis trilogy has illuminated Dr. Joy Buolamwini’s work in Unmasking AI by highlighting how discrimination is so integrated into societies and influences the way we perceive others.

At the start of the trilogy by Butler, the oankali kept mentioning how humans don’t embrace change, discriminate, and how gene-trading will change that. In Dawn, we feel that humans were made to feel terrible for not accepting everyone as they are. The oankali preached about how they would bring change to the human race and what being a human means will change. The oankali made it seem as if they were not capable of discrimination. But as we see in Imago, they showed much bias towards Jodahs and let their preconceived notions get the better of them. “Human beings fear difference,” Lilith had told him once. “Oankali crave difference. Humans persecute their different ones, yet they need them to give themselves definition and status. Oankali seeks differences and collects them. They need it to keep themselves from stagnation. You’ll probably find bath tendencies surfacing in your behavior. When you feel a conflict, try to go the Oankali way. Embrace difference” (Adulthood Rites.) He had probably been treated badly. He did not veer from the Human norm in the same way as other people in the village, and Humans were genetically inclined to be intolerant of difference. They could overcome the inclination, but it was a reality of the Human conflict that they often did not (185-186 Imago). Here again, we see the implication and outward notion that humans, in their nature, are not tolerable but fail to see their own biases. Jodah was born to Tino, Nikanj, and Lilith and showed many characteristics of a male, human oankali construct. Going through his metamorphosis, it was discovered that Jodah was not an Oankali but instead was a human Oolioo construct. It was determined that Jodah was never a male and only showed characteristics of males. The Oankali already had a fear surrounding human-born males and considered them” experimental and potentially dangerous” (Imago, 19). This fear was intensified as the Oankali were not ready for a human construct Ooloi. Human-born Ooloi was defined as a “more potentially deadly being?” The oankali didn’t like males to be born to begin with and their dislike was amplified with Jodah being a male human ooloi. In both Dr. Buolamwini’s work and the trilogy by Butler, we see similar themes of starting an idea with a positive intent but leading down to finding something negative which leaves us with a puzzling question. Does the positive intention negate the negative outcome? 

Dr. Buolamwini’s goal was not only for the good of others, but it was something deeper—it was for her own personal identity and right to engage in society. An experience Dr. Buolamwini had with one of her makeup artists during the Olay campaign led to a deeper realization: “Amy, a tall Nigerian woman, was my makeup artist. When I showed her the print ad, she looked at me with tears welling in her eyes. I know this is supposed to be for little girls, but it’s for me, too. We don’t get to see ourselves celebrated like this.” Her reaction impressed on me the joy of inclusion. I didn’t need another credential to have others feel seen or to be taken seriously” (263). Dr. Buolamwini saw beyond the movement as targeting one group or community but instead impacting a larger group of communities who are also excluded from the beauty industry.

The work being done is important because it brings awareness to the disparities in access to AI technologies and addresses societal challenges brought about by facial recognition AI technologies. In today’s society, technology is advancing at a more rapid pace than ever before. In our everyday lives, we have this tool in our hands that influences our everyday lives. Through the exploration of the parallels between Imago’s journey of advocacy in Lilith’s life and Joy Buolamwini’s real-world advocacy with Olay, we see how fiction and reality reflect one another in powerful ways. Both works highlight how technological biases are not abstract; they impact how people are seen, treated, and valued. So what? This matters to our course because it reveals how Butler’s speculation is not just imagining other worlds– it’s critiquing the one we live in. It connects directly to our work on the ethics of AI and representation but also challenges the ideas of embodiment and autonomy. Who cares? We all should. These systems have been shaping the world’s hiring decisions, healthcare, surveillance, and other powerful platforms. Understanding these connections allows us to question and intervene in how power operates in both literature and technology. Ultimately, that is what our Geneseo education is for: engaging critically across disciplines, making every connection matter, and not only summarizing but interpreting work to help push boundaries. This is meaningful, impactful work.

Octavia Butler’s Xenogenesis series, Dawn and Adulthood Rites, presents an unsettling vision of human survival through the intervention of an alien species, the Oankali. While the Oankali claim to save humanity, their methods challenge fundamental concepts of autonomy, consent, and identity. As a reader, I find their genetic trade, their power over humans, and their manipulation of choice extremely disturbing. The Oankali’s presence forces me to question what it means to be human and whether survival is worth the loss of autonomy. By analyzing their physical ambiguity, their control over humans, and the ethical dilemmas of genetic modification, Butler’s work is disturbing in ways that extend beyond science fiction.

One of the first disturbing aspects of Butler’s fiction is the physical nature of the Oankali. Unlike many alien depictions in science fiction, Butler does not provide a clear visual image of them, leaving readers to struggle with their appearance. This creates an unsettling sense of the unknown. Lilith, the protagonist of Dawn, reacts viscerally to their alien features when she first meets Jdahya. She describes him as neither human nor animal. “Lilith glanced at the humanoid body, wondering how human- like it really was”. (Dawn, pg. 12). This vague yet suggestive description leaves much to my imagination, making the Oankali even more terrifying. The lack of clear imagery explains my discomfort surrounding their role in human survival. If their appearance is so foreign that it defies easy description, how can humans truly coexist with them? The Oankali’s physical ambiguity symbolizes the larger theme of unease throughout the series: they are not just aliens; they are a species whose very existence challenges human understanding and comfort.

The most unsettling aspect of Butler’s fiction is the power imbalance between the Oankali and the surviving humans. While they claim to give humans a choice in their future, it is obvious that humans are powerless to oppose. The Oankali justify their actions by insisting they are saving humanity, but their form of salvation comes at a cost: autonomy. When Lilith first wakes up on their ship, she is disoriented and has no control over her surroundings. The Oankali introduce themselves gradually, controlling how much she learns and manipulating her into cooperation. “That’s why you haven’t told me yet what your people want of us.” “Yes,” he admitted, alarming her. “Tell me!” Silence. “If you knew anything at all about the human imagination, you’d know you were doing exactly the wrong thing,” she said. “Once you’re able to leave this room with me, I’ll answer your questions,” he told her. ” (Dawn, pg. 26). The Oankali’s belief that their way of life is inevitable and non-negotiable. Even as they “inform” humans of their plans, they do not truly offer a choice and do not truly tell humans everything. This dynamic reminds me of real-world discussions of colonialism and coercion. The Oankali insist that humans must interbreed with them to survive, yet this “offer” is deceptive—humans never asked to be saved, and they are not given an alternative. Lilith struggles with this, asking, “What do you trade?” “Ourselves.” “You mean. . . each other? Slaves?” “No. We’ve never done that.” “What, then?” “Ourselves.”  “Your people will change. Your young will be more like us and ours more like you. Your hierarchical tendencies will be modified, and if we learn to regenerate limbs and reshape our bodies, we’ll share those abilities with you. That’s part of the trade. We’re overdue for it.” (Dawn, pg. 44). Butler forces me as a reader to question whether survival is truly worth it if it comes at the cost of autonomy. Another disturbing aspect of Butler’s fiction is the concept of gene-trading. The Oankali do not just save humans; they alter them, mixing their DNA to create hybrid offspring. I think the genetic manipulation introduces ethical dilemmas about identity and consent. In Dawn, Lilith learns that the Oankali will not allow humans to reproduce without genetic merging. Traditional human reproduction is seen as a “flaw” that the Oankali must correct. This is troubling because it removes one of the most fundamental aspects of human agency: the ability to decide how and with whom to reproduce. When Lilith argues against this, Nikanj tells her, “The ooloi will make changes in your reproductive cells before conception and they’ll control conception.” (Dawn, pg.45 ). The Oankali claim that genetic trade benefits all species involved, but their control over human DNA forces a change that we see many humans resist.

By Adulthood Rites, the consequences of this genetic trade become even more apparent. Human-Oankali hybrids, like Akin, exist in a liminal space between species. Akin, despite his human appearance, has Oankali traits such as a grey tongue and heightened sensory abilities. His very existence challenges the definition of humanity. “Akin isn’t quite Human,” she said. “What’s wrong with him?” “Not a thing.” “I mean . . . What’s different about him?”Internal differences. Rapid mental development. Perceptual differences.” (Adulthood Rites, pg. 23). Gene modification raises ethical questions that are still relevant today: What happens when science alters the fundamental aspects of what makes us human? Genetic engineering and modification are already controversial in the real world, and reading Butler’s fiction forces us to consider the long-term consequences of these changes. If humanity begins to engineer itself, who decides which traits are desirable? And what happens to those who resist? Akin, who is a child of both species, struggles with this question. He understands both human and Oankali perspectives, but he is neither fully one nor the other. His intelligence and abilities far exceed those of a normal human child, making him seem alien despite his outwardly human appearance. Similarly, the human resistance movement in Adulthood Rites shows the deep discomfort with these changes. Many humans refuse to accept Oankali hybrids, seeing them as an unnatural corruption of their species. The rejection emphasizes a fundamental fear—if humanity is no longer recognizable, does it still exist? Butler does not provide easy answers, instead forcing readers to grapple with these unsettling possibilities.

I wouldn’t say that I have had a profound revelation about AI, either in terms of using it or learning about it. I believe AI has its benefits. I can understand the stance of those who demonize AI, and it is fascinating to observe. Sometimes I wonder if I didn’t receive the memo about something AI has done and that I don’t know of. When I watch movies that depict artificial intelligence or robots taking over the world, and I hear people claim that we are getting closer to that reality, I don’t understand. In my opinion, we are far from such a scenario, and it won’t be a reality for a long time. This perspective relates to the concept of the “Art of Scaring” by Skrzypczyk. I think many people tend to attribute too much power to today’s artificial intelligence, but I believe we are simply not there yet.

In the few weeks I’ve been in this class, I have been exposed to new ideas and different ways of thinking, thanks to my peers as well as the texts, media, and literature we engage with. 

I feel lucky to be living in an era where AI is readily accessible, especially as we discuss its societal impacts and ethical considerations. Sometimes, I feel a bit sad; maybe because I wish I could see what the future holds for AI when today’s capabilities are viewed as outdated. However, this feeling also fills me with hope and excitement for the advancements I will witness in my lifetime. I often joke about how students before me whether in high school or higher education managed their work without tools like ChatGPT. AI has helped me in many ways. For example, AI-based tools have helped me in planning and organizing my thoughts on assignments when I don’t know where to begin. This assistance has not only saved me time but also improved the quality of my work.

While reading the article “Can A.I. Be Blamed for a Teen’s Suicide?” from The New York Times, I encountered a statement that surprised me: “The technology is also improving quickly. Today’s A.I. companions can remember past conversations, adapt to users’ communication styles, role-play as celebrities or historical figures, and chat fluently about nearly any subject. Some can send A.I.-generated ‘selfies’ to users or communicate with them using lifelike synthetic voices.” I was honestly shocked, I didn’t know that advanced tools like these existed and continue to advance. I found the different ways A.I. is being designed and used today to be fascinating. My experience with artificial intelligence has been limited to platforms like ChatGPT, Copilot, and other well-known A.I. sites, which now seem basic compared to these imaginative tools that can send A.I. selfies or engage in conversations with realistic voices.

The article, “Can A.I. Be Blamed for a Teen’s Suicide?”  also presented conflicting perspectives about AI companions: “It’s going to be super, super helpful to a lot of people who are lonely or depressed,” it says, yet it also warns that “A.I. companions may actually worsen isolation, by replacing human relationships with artificial ones.” I see both sides of this argument, one suggests lonely people might benefit from AI companionship, while the other highlights the potential danger of becoming too dependent on AI companionship. I believe two things can be true at the same time. Maybe with better regulations and stricter oversight, lonely individuals can benefit from these AI companions without becoming overly dependent. I don’t think we should demonize artificial companionship simply because it seems unfamiliar. If some people truly value these relationships, who are we to say that is not valid? The situation described in the article is tragic but highlights valuable lessons on the need for responsible AI development.

In class, we discussed various media and ideas that explore both the promises and pitfalls associated with Artificial Intelligence. One meaningful moment was when we talked about the environmental implications of AI. Before that class discussion, I was unaware of the large amounts of water required to cool the data centers that power searches on AI platforms like ChatGPT. I was very surprised to learn this fact, and it has made me become more aware of the ethical considerations surrounding AI, as well as the negative environmental impacts that many of us often forget. AI’s role in fields like healthcare is another scope that shows how artificial intelligence is incorporated into our society whether we like it or not and whether we recognize it or not. In class, we also discussed how an AI model was trained to detect cancer but mistook the presence of a ruler in an image as an indicator of cancer. Though these mistakes were made in good faith, they show the importance of careful and ethical AI use, especially in critical areas like healthcare. During the same class discussion, we also talked about how a significant part of the healthcare system—healthcare insurance companies—uses AI in ways that can be harmful to their customers, such as denying coverage based on algorithmic predictions. I believe this is where people become wary of artificial intelligence. This concern arises because AI models are essentially interacting with real lives. I also struggle to grapple with this issue because when a human makes a mistake that causes harm to someone, they can be held accountable. However, in the case of artificial intelligence, when mistakes occur, it’s challenging to hold AI accountable. We typically have to go back to the human who trained the AI or the human who created it. This is something I find difficult to reconcile, especially given the rise of artificial intelligence. Once AI is created and released to the public, if someone misuses it, can we blame the creator? After all, they did not intend for their AI to be used in a harmful way.

Yet, even with the limitations of present-day AI, I find myself hopeful. The future of AI is unknown, but its potential to help people connect, learn, and grow inspires me to stay curious and open-minded about what’s to come. Overall, my experiences with AI have been more encouraging than discouraging.