Just Because We Camp, Doesn't Mean We Should: The Ethics of Modelling Queer Voices

Modern voice cloning models claim to be able to capture a diverse range of voices. We test the ability of a typical pipeline to capture the style known colloquially as "gay voice" and notice a homogenisation effect: synthesised speech is rated as sounding significantly "less gay" (by LGBTQ+ participants) than its corresponding ground-truth for speakers with "gay voice", but ratings actually increase for control speakers. Loss of "gay voice" has implications for accessibility. We also find that for speakers with "gay voice", loss of "gay voice" corresponds to lower similarity ratings. However, we caution that improving the ability of such models to synthesise ``gay voice'' comes with a great number of risks. We use this pipeline as a starting point for a discussion on the ethics of modelling queer voices more broadly. Collecting "clean" queer data has safety and fairness ramifications, and the resulting technology may cause harms from mockery to death.

Stereotypes and Smut: The (Mis)representation of Non-cisgender Identities by Text-to-Image Models

Cutting-edge image generation has been praised for producing high-quality images, suggesting a ubiquitous future in a variety of applications. However, initial studies have pointed to the potential for harm due to predictive bias, reflecting and potentially reinforcing cultural stereotypes. In this work, we are the first to investigate how multimodal models handle diverse gender identities. Concretely, we conduct a thorough analysis in which we compare the output of three image generation models for prompts containing cisgender vs. non-cisgender identity terms. Our findings demonstrate that certain non-cisgender identities are consistently (mis)represented as less human, more stereotyped and more sexualised. We complement our experimental analysis with (a)~a survey among non-cisgender individuals and (b) a series of interviews, to establish which harms affected individuals anticipate, and how they would like to be represented. We find respondents are particularly concerned about misrepresentation, and the potential to drive harmful behaviours and beliefs. Simple heuristics to limit offensive content are widely rejected, and instead respondents call for community involvement, curated training data and the ability to customise. These improvements could pave the way for a future where change is led by the affected community, and technology is used to positively ``[portray] queerness in ways that we haven't even thought of'' rather than reproducing stale, offensive stereotypes.

A Robust Bias Mitigation Procedure Based on the Stereotype Content Model

The Stereotype Content model (SCM) states that we tend to perceive minority groups as cold, incompetent or both. In this paper we adapt existing work to demonstrate that the Stereotype Content model holds for contextualised word embeddings, then use these results to evaluate a fine-tuning process designed to drive a language model away from stereotyped portrayals of minority groups. We find the SCM terms are better able to capture bias than demographic agnostic terms related to pleasantness. Further, we were able to reduce the presence of stereotypes in the model through a simple fine-tuning procedure that required minimal human and computer resources, without harming downstream performance. We present this work as a prototype of a debiasing procedure that aims to remove the need for a priori knowledge of the specifics of bias in the model.