PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 23, 2026Gender Work and Organization1 citations

FeministAI at Work

View Full Paper
ZCZhisheng Chen

Key Points

  • The aim is to explore how AI embeds gendered and intersectional inequalities in organizations.
  • Theorizing feminist algorithmic rationality through three mechanisms: protocolization, quantification, and feedback loops.
  • Historical analysis of AI alongside Taylorism and platform governance.
  • Development of a FeministAI governance framework based on intersectionality and care ethics.
  • AI systems often reinforce existing gendered inequalities rather than alleviating them.
  • Identified mechanisms contribute to normalizing exclusion within organizational practices.
  • Proposed governance framework aims to reimagine rationality beyond mere technical solutions.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Artificial intelligence (AI) is widely promoted as a neutral and efficient solution to organizational bias, yet its deployment often intensifies gendered and intersectional inequalities. Existing literatures provide partial accounts: algorithmic management emphasizes control without addressing gender; bias research treats discrimination as a technical anomaly; and feminist critiques diagnose patriarchy but lack a mechanism‐based explanation of how AI embeds inequality. To address this gap, we theorize feminist algorithmic rationality, a regime in which AI reconfigures managerial logics upstream through three mechanisms: the protocolization of gendered work, the quantification of subjectivity, and corpus feedback loops that normalize exclusion as organizational common sense. By situating this framework historically alongside Taylorism and platform governance, we highlight both continuities in masculinized rationalities and ruptures in the bureaucratization of language and data. Building on these insights, we propose a FeministAI governance framework grounded in intersectionality, transparency, and care ethics, moving beyond technical fixes to reimagine organizational rationality. We argue that, without feminist intervention, AI‐enabled decision systems risk institutionalizing inequality by embedding gendered assumptions into organizational categories, metrics, and routines, which we conceptualize as algorithmic patriarchy, where inequality becomes an upstream condition of evaluation rather than a downstream error to be corrected.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zhisheng Chen (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e9b89b85696592c86ebb69https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.70169
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The Feminization of Labour in Cognitive Capitalism2007 · 201 citations
  2. 2Metrics and Algorithms for Identifying and Mitigating Bias in AI Design: A Counterfactual Fairness Approach2025 · 13 citations
  3. 3Feminist AI2023 · 34 citations
  4. 4Moral Boundaries2020 · 429 citations
  5. 5The Janus face of artificial intelligence feedback: Deployment versus disclosure effects on employee performance2021 · 509 citations