Theme: Impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Theological Education.
Topic: A Quest for Gender Justice in the Age of AI
Research Paper
Submitted to
Dr. Amongla Jamir
Serampore College,
Faculty of Theology & NIIPGTS
In
Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirement for
MCT007: Integrated Course
By
Akangkokba
Date: 26 October, 2025
This work was done by me in good faith and honesty and I affirm the honor code.
0
Introduction
The intersection of gender and technology is increasingly critical as questions of sex, gender
identity, and justice extend into AI-driven spaces. While AI offers efficiency and innovation,
it often mirrors and amplifies societal biases, revealing that technology, though seemingly
neutral, reflects human prejudice and cultural assumptions. This presentation examines how
AI and theology can engage to promote gender justice, grounding the discussion in the
concepts of sex, gender identity, and justice, and exploring AI’s impact on them. Using praxis
theology, it argues that theological education must move beyond critique toward liberative
action, reimagining theology as active engagement in the struggle for justice, ensuring
technology advances human dignity, equality, and flourishing. The study employs a praxis-
oriented, contextual theological methodology.
1. Conceptual Foundations: Sex, Gender Identity, and Gender Justice
Some believe sexual orientation is a fixed, biological trait and that people are “born that
way,” but scientific evidence is limited. Sexual orientation is complex, involving behaviors,
attractions, and identity. Genetics show only modest links, and biological explanations such
as prenatal hormones or brain differences remain inconclusive. Environmental factors,
including childhood experiences, may also play a role. Overall, research indicates that sexual
orientation is fluid rather than strictly innate.1 With that being said, the question is, how many
sexes actually exist? While the common assumption is “two,” and statistics textbooks often
present sex/gender as a clear-cut binary variable, a closer look at textual, anthropological,
medical, and other sources reveals that the reality is far more complex.2 Although the
complexities of this matter will not be examined in detail, a brief overview is necessary to
provide the background for the following discussion, which are as follows:
1.1. Sex
While “Sex” and “Gender” are often mistakenly used as synonyms, they point to separate
dimensions of human identity. Sex refers to the biological and functional differences between
male and female bodies-starting from conception and evolving throughout development. It is
1
Lawrence S. Mayer and Paul R. McHugh, “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological,
Psychological, and Social Sciences,” The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology & Society, no. 50 (2016): 13,
accessed on 14 August, 2025, [Link]
2
Leonard Zwilling and Michael J. Sweet, “The Evolution of Third-Sex in Ancient India: A Study in
Ambiguity,” in Invented Identities: The Interplay of Gender and Politics in India, ed. Julia Leslie and Mary
McGee (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2000), 99.
1
primarily associated with physical and physiological features including chromosomes, gene
expression, hormone levels and function, and reproductive or sexual anatomy. Typically,
females inherit two X chromosomes, while males inherit one X and one Y chromosomal
variation leads to other physical distinctions.3
1.2. Gender Identity
The term gender emerged in the early 1970s as an analytical category. It served to
differentiate biological distinctions of sex from the socially constructed meanings attributed
to them; meanings that regulate behaviours, roles, and competencies, subsequently
categorized as “masculine” or “feminine.”4 Gender typically refers to the social process of
dividing up people and social practices along the lines of sexed identities. The gendering
process frequently involves creating hierarchies between the divisions it enacts. Gender in the
modern West usually refers to two distinct and separate categories of human beings as well as
to the division of social practices into two fields.5 Gender refers to the psychological and
behavioural traits linked to masculinity and femininity. Gender identity is one’s inner sense
of being male, female, or non-binary, while gender roles are cultural expectations about how
people should act based on their gender.6
In other word, gender identity is internal and private (how you see and feel about yourself
male, female, both, neither, or somewhere in between) on the other hand Gender role is
external and public (how you show that identity to others through words, actions, clothing,
behaviour, etc.) They are closely linked but not the same. Someone might identify as one
particular gender but present themselves differently because of culture, safety, or personal
choice. The distinction between sex and gender lies in the fact that sex roles are shaped by
biological factors, while gender roles are socially, historically, and culturally constructed.
John money and Anke A. Ehrhardt also mentions:
3
Alana Brown, et al., “Sex and Gender Science: The World Writes on the Body”, in Sex Differences in
Brain Function and Dysfunction, ed. Claire Gibson and Liisa A. M. Galea (Switzerland: Springer, 2023), 4-5.
4
Jane Pilcher and Imelda Whelehan, Fifty Key Concepts in Gender Studies (London: SAGE
Publications, 2004), 56. Moreover, Jane and Imelda is of view that; “the purpose of affirming a sex/gender
distinction was to argue that the actual physical or mental effects of biological difference had been exaggerated
to maintain a patriarchal system of power and to create a consciousness among women that they were naturally
better suited to ‘domestic’ roles.”
5
Chris Beasley, Gender and Sexuality: Critical Theories, Critical Thinkers (New Delhi: Sage, 2005),
11.
6
S.N. Among Jamir, “Gender Identities and Queer Lives: Envisioning a Rainbow Community,” in
LGBTQIA+ Minorities and Identities for an Inclusive Community, ed. Aswathy John (Serampore, West Bengal:
SATHRI, 2005), 16.
2
Gender Identity: The sameness, unity, and persistence of one’s individuality as male, female,
or ambivalent, in greater or lesser degree, especially as it is experienced in self-awareness and
behaviour, gender identity is the private experience of gender role, and gender role is the
public expression of gender identity. Gender Role: Everything that a person says and does, to
indicate to other or to the self the degree that one is either male, or female, or ambivalent it
includes but is not restricted to sexual arousal and response; gender role is the public
expression of gender identity, and gender identity is the private experience of gender role.7
1.3. Gender justice
Gender justice means promoting and protecting civil, political, economic, and social rights
through gender equality. It aims to eliminate inequalities that cause subordination and
oppression while addressing the unique barriers faced by women, men, and LGBTQIA+
persons. Ultimately, it strives to ensure fairness, dignity, and equality for all through gender-
sensitive approaches.8 Gender justice means ensuring the fair and equal treatment of women
and girls by protecting their rights, dignity, and opportunities. It challenges discriminatory
norms, customs, and policies that oppress women, while promoting equality and advocating
for the rights of all marginalized and vulnerable groups. Elezabeth further say “I believe that
this desire for justice and equality is usually one that extends beyond a concern for women’s
rights, to a commitment to the struggle for the right of all people.”9 Thus, gender justice seeks
equality and protection for all, extending beyond women’s rights to the rights of every
marginalized person.
2. Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Artificial Intelligence (AI) refers to computer systems designed to perform tasks that
typically require human intelligence, such as learning, problem-solving, decision-making,
language understanding, image recognition, and prediction. Most modern AI relies on
Machine Learning (ML), where algorithms learn from data,10 and deep learning, a branch of
7
John Money and Anke A. Ehrhardt, Man & Woman Boy & Girl: The Differentiation and Dimorphism
of Gender Identity from Conception to maturity (London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972), np.
8
Liza B. Lamis, “Empowering the Church for Gender Justice,” Christian Conference of Asia 23/3
(2007): 32, accessed on September 4, 2025, [Link]
9
Elezabeth Fisher and Linda Gray MacKay, Gender Justice: Women’s Rights are Human Rights
(Cambridge: Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, 1996), xiv.
10
“AI includes efficient methods to analyze connections between data, which are then used by the Ai
algorithm to learn such connections. Data and algorithm are thus both vital part of an Ai system. An enormous
amount of data is needed to train AI systems and for such systems to perform well.” Cited in United Nations
University Institute in Macau, Gender, Digital Transformation and Artificial Intelligence: Asia-Pacific Report
3
ML that uses neural networks to detect complex patterns.11 Key technologies like Natural
Language Processing (NLP) and Natural Language Generation (NLG) power applications
such as chatbots, virtual assistants, and Large Language Models (LLMs).12 AI is generally
classified into three major types: Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI), which is task-specific
and represents the dominant form in use today; Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), a still-
hypothetical13 form that aims to match human-level intelligence across a variety of tasks; and
Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI), a theoretical concept of machines surpassing human
intelligence in every way. These categories reflect how AI has evolved, its current
applications, and the potential impacts it could have in the future.14 Thus, it is evident that AI
is still programmable and will continue to develop into better versions in the future.
3. Gender and Technology
Throughout history, human has shown creativity in developing new tools and technologies,
beginning from learning how to make fire to stone tools, automation, and AI is a continuation
of that process. It is thus worth mentioning that the human society and the technologies are
always closely interwoven together.15 This interconnection between human society and
technology was most evident during the Industrial Revolution (IR).16
The first IR was triggered by water and steam power, making the transition from human
labour to mechanical manufacturing. The second to fourth IR was built on electric power,
technologies to facilitate mass production based on division of labour.17 With
industrialization’s rapid growth, technological and organizational advances reduced the need
(Macau: United Nations University Institute in Macau, 2023), 35, accessed on September 2, 2025,
[Link]
11
Michael Negevitsky, Artificial Intelligence: A Guide to Intelligent Systems, 2nd ed. (Harlow,
England: Addison-Wesley, 2005), 165-166.
12
Isabel Barberá, AI Privacy Risks & Mitigations – Large Language Models (LLMs) (Brussels:
European Data Protection Board, 2025), 6, accessed on September 2, 2025,
[Link]
13
At present, genuine AGI has not yet been achieved to its fullest potential, though ongoing research
and development continue to pursue it.
14
Soummya Clowdhury et al., Artificial Intelligence and Machine learning: Concepts, Tools, and Case
Studies, 1st ed. (Palwal, Haryana: Chyren Publication, 2025), 34.
15
Human beings and technology are closely interwoven. Whenever a new technology is created, it
either poses challenges or offers complementary benefits. Once it emerges, we cannot simply ignore it; rather,
we must either question it or adapt to it in an ethically efficient and constructive way.
16
“Indeed, the story of the Industrial Revolution as the great watershed in Human History is build
around a discontinuous rate of technological change occurring in the eighteenth century, that makes technology
the centre of human wellbeing.” Cited in Douclass C. North, Institutions, Institutional change and Economic
performance (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 131.
17
T.T. Bhat, India and Industry (New Delhi: Institute for Studies in Industrial Development, 2020), 3.
4
for individual skills but increased efficiency and competition. Many men, feeling threatened,
used their collective power to limit women’s access to certain jobs, institutionalizing gender-
based exclusion and modern gender injustice.18 Stated briefly, the emergence of newer and
more advanced technologies consistently brings with new challenges and responsibilities,
also in the field of gender. This raises a pressing question: Who benefits from AI? Can AI
and theology be integrated to work towards gender justice?” The issue of gender justice
among humans is still a distant fulfilment, and yet we are challenged with AI in theological
education. It is, therefore, necessary to examine the challenges posed by the emergence of AI
in relation to gender justice which will be discussed below:
3.1. AI Bias in Decision Making
AI Bias19 can arise at multiple stages during the development and operation of a system,
stemming from the processes of data generation, collection, and analysis. Consequently, the
primary source of AI bias is often the data used to make decisions or predictions. In addition,
the design and construction of the AI system itself can introduce or reinforce bias. Finally,
bias may also emerge from factors related to the users who interpret and act upon the
system’s outputs.20 The main source is often biased or unrepresentative data, which affects all
stages of development. For instance, Google Translate has reinforced gender stereotypes by
associating “nurse” with women, and computer vision systems have mislabelled cultural
images or linked cooking with women. Face-recognition tools also perform less accurately
for women, Black individuals, and younger people. These examples show that bias arises
from both data and design, emphasizing the need for diverse datasets and responsible AI
development.21 Further, several related issues connected to the points mentioned above will
be discussed below:
3.1.1. Automatic Gender Recognition (AGR)
18
Alastair Greig, Frank Lewins, and Kevin White, Inequality in Australia (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2003), 198.
19
Bias means a strong inclination either in favour or against something, bias results from the
assumptions made by the specific model. Cited in Siraj Kariyilaparambu Kunjumuhammed, Hisham Madi, and
Mahmoud Abouraia, eds., Risks and Challenges of AI-Driven Finance: Bias, Ethics, and Security (Hershey, PA:
Business Science Reference, an imprint of IGI Global, 2024), 5.
20
Kunjumuhammed, Madi, and Abouraia, eds., Risks and Challenges of AI-Driven Finance: Bias,
Ethics, and Security, 5.
21
United Nations University Institute in Macau, Gender, Digital Transformation and Artificial
Intelligence: Asia-Pacific Report (Macau: United Nations University Institute in Macau, 2023), 35, accessed on
September 2, 2025, [Link]
5
AGR is an AI technology that identifies a person’s gender from photos or videos by
analyzing facial features, body shape, skin texture, or body shape through techniques like 3D
modeling or gait analysis. It is used in facial recognition systems, public access control like
bathrooms and changing rooms, social media analysis, and targeted advertising or shopping
recommendations. Although it aims to improve efficiency and personalization, AGR
reinforces binary, cisnormative views of gender, often misclassifying or excluding
transgender and non-binary individuals. By assuming only “male” or “female” categories,
AGR erases diverse gender identities and discriminates against the LGBTQIA+ community,
leading to misgendering, social bias, and exclusion from digital and physical spaces.22
3.1.2. Algorithmic Bias in Hiring
Finding candidates with the right skills is crucial for organizations, but hiring is complex and
time-consuming, making it a prime area for technological intervention. AI promises to
objectify hiring and reduce human bias. However, this optimism is tempered by evidence that
AI can replicate and even amplify biases.23 One example is gender-targeted algorithmic
profiling in job ads. A study by Global Witness across six countries found that Facebook’s
job ads disproportionately targeted men for mechanic roles and women for preschool
teaching, with extremes such as 97% of receptionist ads shown to women in the Netherlands.
Another example is Amazon’s AI hiring tool, which was trained on male-dominated data and
penalized resumes containing terms like “women’s,” effectively discriminating against
female applicants and reinforcing gender bias in recruitment. LGBTQIA+ identities are often
invisible in AI hiring systems, as most algorithms are built on cisnormative and
heteronormative data that exclude or misrepresent them. This invisibility reinforces structural
discrimination and limits fair representation in recruitment. Safiya Noble highlights how
racist algorithms in search engines perpetuate intersectional sexism and racism.24
3.1.3. Data Collection: Using Past Data to Determine Future Outcomes
22
Os Keyes, “The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Implications of Automatic Gender
Recognition,” Proceedings of the ACM on Human–Computer Interaction 2/88 CSCW (2018): 4-5, accessed on
September 2, 2025, [Link]
23
Elisabeth Kelan, Patterns of Inclusion: How Gender Matters for Automation, Artificial Intelligence
and the Future of Work (London: Routledge, 2024), 71-72.
24
Cited in Birit Schippers, “Just AI? Gender, Power, and Intersectional Discrimination,” in Artificial
Intelligence & Work: Transforming Work, Organizations, and Society in an Age of Insecurity, ed. John Bratton
and Laura Steele (London: Sage, 2025), 116-118.
6
Relying on past data to shape predictions about the future often ends up carrying forward the
same biases that already exist in society.25 Marginalized groups such as women, people of
color, persons with disabilities, and LGBTQIA+ communities have historically faced
discrimination, so data about them often reflects systemic barriers rather than their true
abilities. When predictive models rely on such biased data, they perpetuate exclusion,
creating a cycle that makes these groups appear less capable or successful. For instance, in
predictive policing, biased records label Black neighborhoods as “high-crime areas,”
prompting increased police presence, which leads to more arrests and reinforces the false
perception of higher crime, even though studies show similar rates of offenses across
communities.26 This same cycle happens with gender bias in data-driven systems, where past
inequalities keep being repeated, leaving women and marginalized groups at a disadvantage
not only in criminal cases but also in many other stereotyping cases.
In India, this issue is particularly evident for transgender individuals, including the Hijra
community. The AI Now Institute, a reputable research organization studying AI and societal
impact, highlights that the 2011 Census was the first to enumerate transgender persons,
categorizing them under the ambiguous label of “Others.” This undercounting and
misrepresentation led to datasets that inadequately reflect transgender realities, causing AI
systems trained on such data to make biased or exclusionary decisions. Their report
Discriminating Systems: Gender, Race, and Power in AI further emphasizes that without
inclusive data and diverse development teams, AI systems are likely to reinforce existing
inequalities, perpetuating systemic discrimination against marginalized genders.27
3.1.4. AI in Healthcare and Gender
AI enhances Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) by improving access to
information, care, and education. Chatbots offer anonymous guidance on sexual health and
contraception, while AI analyzes medical data for screening, diagnosis, and personalized
treatment, including HIV therapy. It supports health monitoring, tracks population trends,
25
Auzuir Ripardo de Alexandria, ed al., AI-Driven Solutions for Solar Energy Efficiency, Irradiance
Modeling, and PV Forecasting (Hershey, PA: IGI Global Scientific Publishing, 2026), 261.
26
Timnit Gebru, “Race and gender,” in The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of AI, eds., Markus D. Dubber,
Frank Pasquale, and Sunit Das (New York: Oxford University press, 2020), 256.
27
Brindaalakshmi K. Brindaa, A New AI Lexicon: Gender, AI Now Institute (15 December 2021),
accessed on September 3, 2025, [Link]
7
aids system planning, and accelerates research such as drug discovery and genomic analysis,
strengthening SRHR services overall.28
On the other hand, AI systems in SRHR rely on vast amounts of personal health data, making
privacy and security crucial, as breaches (break or failure in data security) can have severe
consequences, particularly for young women, sex workers, gender-diverse people, and other
marginalized groups facing stigma and discrimination. Unauthorized access to sensitive
information on issues such as abortion or sexual health is especially dangerous in contexts
with limited legal protections, where breaches can lead to emotional distress, financial harm,
or threats to personal safety.29 Alongside these risks, AI also faces the challenge of
misinformation, as many models are trained on large internet and social media datasets that
may contain poor-quality or biased information. This can result in AI hallucinations
(information that sounds correct but is actually false or misleading,), where systems generate
false but convincing outputs, potentially spreading harmful myths or inaccuracies about
SRHR.30
4. Humans as Making AI Bias
Interviews with technology professionals by Elisabeth Kelan revealed a shared understanding
that algorithmic bias originates from human bias rather than from algorithms themselves.
Lucy argued that algorithms merely process data and reinforce existing biases embedded in
training datasets, while Franklin emphasized that AI amplifies pre-existing human biases.
Anton described algorithmic bias as a human problem, noting that machine learning
replicates patterns in data but also offers an opportunity to make hidden biases visible and
addressable. Howard similarly highlighted that AI can expose historical discrimination within
organizations. Collectively, these perspectives suggest a view in which algorithmic bias
though reflecting human prejudice, can also serve as a tool for identifying and mitigating
28
Cited in More recently, generative AI is also being applied to large multi-modal models (LMMs),
which can process various types of data sets, including biosensor, audio and image data, to generate outputs in
different formats Generative AI has also led to the development of general-purpose foundational models, such
as LLMs like ChatGPT that have broad applicability, which can potentially be adapted for SRHR-related
contexts and use. This contrasts with prior approaches in AI ML models that were designed for predefined use
cases, such as prediction of a specific condition. World Health Organization, The Role of Artificial Intelligence
in Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights: Technical Brief (March 2024), 3-4, accessed on September 3,
2025, [Link]
29
Sonia K. Katyal and Jessica Y. Jung, “The Gender Panoptican: Al, Gender, and Design Justice,”
UCLA Law Review (January 2022): 164, accessed on September 2, 2025 [Link]
gender-panopticon-ai-gender-and-design-justice/.
30
World Health Organization, The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Sexual and Reproductive Health
and Rights: Technical Brief, 6-8.
8
existing inequities.31 Sonia K. Katyal and Jessica Y. Jung also question that: “Is the data
biased, or are “we” the bias that produces the data that is available to us?” the answer seems
to be both. Training data usually comes from sources that only recognize two gender options,
so it reflects assumptions shaped by the specific culture, language, and place where the data
was gathered.32
The question of “who is to blame” remains hypothetical33, yet the discussion above
demonstrates that AI bias is very much a present reality. Evidence shows that algorithmic
bias originates from human prejudice rather than the algorithms themselves. Algorithms
simply process data and can reinforce pre-existing biases in their training sets, thereby
amplifying human biases, as noted by Elisabeth Kelan. Similarly, Anton described
algorithmic bias as a human issue, pointing out that while machine learning replicates
patterns in data, it also provides an opportunity to reveal and address hidden biases. Therefore,
AI does not stagnant merely as an agent of bias when it comes to gender but also an agent of
making hidden biases visible and addressable, in other words ‘AI exposes the urgency of the
quest for gender Justice.’ In order to address this from a theological education, and moreover
with the question being raised in Point 2 (Can AI and theology be integrated to work towards
gender justice?) I would like to propose ‘Praxis Theology’ which is a mode of study in
theological education which will be discussed below:
4.1. Praxis Theology and AI in a Quest for Gender Justice
Practical Theology also recognizes this interaction theory and Praxis. These concepts are
defined from a theological perspective and directed towards the praxis of mediation, as the
specific practical-theological focus, but without isolating this action from society as a
whole.34 Gustavo Gutiérrez said “One of the statements of my way of understanding the
theological task was that liberation theology is a critical reflection on Christian praxis in
31
Kelan, Patterns of Inclusion: How Gender Matters for Automation, 80.
32
Katyal and Jung, “The Gender Panoptican: Al, Gender, and Design Justice,” 105.
33
Here ‘hypothetical’ refers to different opinions hold by different people be it neutral, or to the
extreme right or left.
34
Praxis is understood as the action of individual or groups in society, within and outside the church,
who are willing to be inspired in their private and public lives by the Christian tradition, and who wants to focus
on the salvation of humankind and the world. Cited in Gerben Heitink, Practical Theology History. Theory.
Action: Manuel for Practical theology, Trans. Reinder Bruinsma (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eermans
Publishing Company, 1999), 151.
9
light of the word of God.”35 Christian praxis is the lived expression of faith through action. As
St. Paul tells us that, “faith works through charity,” showing that love is both the nourishment
and the fullness of faith, the gift of oneself to others. True belief is not mere intellectual
assent but a self-giving commitment to God and neighbor, guiding one’s attitude and
engagement in the world. This understanding of praxis faith actively transforming life is
further reinforced by Marxist thought, which highlights committed action aimed at changing
unjust social conditions.36
Thus, praxis theology calls for a church and theological education that is not just confined in
their safe space but to actively engage outside of it.37 Not just theories and sermons but an
active participant in social change; bringing justice, equality, love and peace that transforms
the wider society and beyond. M.M Thomas who is a contextual theologian also exemplified
integration of faith and social action, where he defines salvation not just as an inward
spirituality but also through true humanization and that humanisation is the message of
salvation in Christ. For Him, Salvation is both present realities, and eschatological in
nature.38 Keeping this in mind let us discuss some possible approach:
4.1.1. Praxis in Theological Education
The progress of a society or nation is largely dependent on the achievement of education and
literacy, and Christians have historically played and continues to play a significant role in this
area; whether through mission initiatives or the training of leaders. Theological education, in
particular, is teleologically oriented: it points toward an eschatological vision of
reconciliation and harmony between God, humanity, and creation.39 Thus theological
education is not just about learning doctrines and theories. It’s about shaping leaders who live
out God’s mission of reconciliation, so that education itself becomes part of God’s plan to
bring wholeness and justice into the world. Therefore, theological education must actively
train students to engage critically with artificial intelligence, recognizing that they will be
35
Gustavo Gutiérrez, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation, ed. and trans. Sister
Caridad Inda and John Eagleson (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988), xxix.
36
Gutiérrez, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation, 5-6, 8.
37
This statement does not claim that the church and the theological education are not engaging out of
their field but rather a call to engage actively even in the area of Ai and Gender Justice.
38
M.M. Thomas, Salvation and Humanisation: Some Crucial Issues of Mission in Contemporary India
(Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1971), 8.
39
Kathleen A. Cahalan, Edward Foley, and Gordon S. Mikoski. Eds., Integrating Work in Theological
Education (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2017), np, accessed on September 4, 2025,
[Link]
&gbpv=1&dq=task+of+theological+education&pg=PT134&printsec=frontcover.
10
sent out as church leaders, social reformers, scholars, or educators. By doing so, they can
ensure that in their ministries and work, technology is used and helped others to use
responsibly to promote justice, equality, and human dignity, making God’s mission of
reconciliation relevant in today’s AI-driven world.
4.1.2. Praxis Theology a Call for Unity of all
The AI bias as mentioned earlier is a very complex issue be it the educational institution,
church, Government, industries and institutions, civil society and those who are being
marginalized. To tackle this effectively, the effort of one group alone will not be sufficient;
no single sector can solve this challenge in isolation. Therefore the praxis theology calls for a
collective action and voice where all are standing together as one single prophetic voice for
the biases that are happening with different genders. As shared responsibility to deconstruct
and reconstruct technologies that serves justices, equality and human dignity. M. M. Thomas
captures this challenge when he writes:
Certainly sin has its corporate expression in the dehumanising spiritual forces of corporate
life, the demons of principalities and powers; and the victory of Christ should mean victory
over them and salvation in Christ must find its manifestation in power over these forces as
power for the humanisation of our structures of collective existence… Salvation remains
eschatological, but the historical responsibility within the eschatological framework cannot
but include the task of humanisation of the world in secular history.40
M. M. Thomas’ affirmation that sin finds expression in the “dehumanising spiritual forces of
corporate life” gives us a theological framework for seeing AI bias as more than just a
technical flaw but a structural, corporate distortion that perpetuates injustice. If salvation in
Christ manifests as power for the humanisation of our structures of collective existence, then
confronting AI bias is not the task of one group alone. It becomes a shared responsibility of
all sectors; church, governments, industries, educational institutions, and civil society, to
stand together against these dehumanising forces. This shared responsibility can take concrete
forms across different sectors, each contributing in ways that reflect their unique role in
transforming society:
i. Church: The church can educate leaders and congregations about the ethical implications
of AI, advocate for moral responsibility in technology, and foster programs that support
marginalized groups affected by AI bias.
40
Thomas, Salvation and Humanisation: 8.
11
ii. Governments: Governments can create regulations ensuring transparency and
accountability in AI, monitor AI systems for discriminatory practices, and fund research on
inclusive AI development and social impact.
iii. Industries: Businesses and tech companies can implement bias audits, involve diverse
teams in AI design and testing, and promote corporate social responsibility initiatives that
address digital inequities.
iv. Educational Institutions: Schools and universities can integrate AI ethics and social
responsibility into curricula, conduct research on AI’s societal impact, and collaborate with
other sectors for workshops and awareness campaigns.
v. Civil Society: NGOs and community groups can advocate for affected communities, raise
public awareness about AI ethics, and act as watchdogs, reporting and challenging instances
of discrimination.
Reflection and Conclusion
The interaction and meeting point of AI, theology, and gender justice is both a serious
challenge and an opportunity for theological education today. AI technologies, built by
humans to make life better and easier, today emerge as a double-edged sword with their own
pros and cons. The fact that AI cannot generate on its own, yet still makes choices and
produces outputs that frequently reinforce injustice through biased data, flawed algorithms,
and discriminatory outcomes, points towards a bright window where AI is revealing the
existing biases showing where humans need to pay attention and act, if left unchecked, these
systems become new “structures of Pharaoh,” distorting human dignity and excluding women,
sexual minorities, LGBTQIA+, and marginalized groups.
However, Praxis theology, insists that faith is not only theoretical but also active and
transformative. Grounded in the truth that every human being is cared and loved by a justice
and liberating God ‘justice, equality, and dignity for all people’. In the context of AI,
theological education must therefore resist the temptation of remaining in safe spaces and
instead shape leaders who critically engage, speak prophetically, and act transformatively,
which requires theological education to critically engage in training students, a prophetic
witness calling both secular and religion and challenge the powers that perpetuate oppression,
and moving beyond words into concrete action that reshapes both society and technology
towards justice, equality and inclusivity.
12
Bibliography
Alexandria, Auzuir Ripardo de, Prashant Upadhyay, Antonino Galletta, Yashaswini Shaema,
and Satya Prakash Yadav. AI-Driven Solutions for Solar Energy Efficiency, Irradiance
Modeling, and PV Forecasting. Hershey, PA: IGI Global Scientific Publishing, 2026.
Barberá, Isabel. AI Privacy Risks & Mitigations – Large Language Models (LLMs). Brussels:
European Data Protection Board, 2025. Accessed on September 2, 2025.
[Link]
[Link].6.
Beasley, Chris. Gender and Sexuality: Critical Theories, Critical Thinkers. New Delhi: Sage,
2005.
Bhat, T.T. India and Industry. New Delhi: Institute for Studies in Industrial Development,
2020.
Brindaa, Brindaalakshmi K. A New AI Lexicon: Gender, AI Now Institute (15 December
2021) Accessed on September 3, 2025, [Link]
new-ai-lexicon-gender.
Cahalan, Kathleen A., Edward Foley, and Gordon S. Mikoski, eds. Integrating Work in
Theological Education. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2017. Accessed on
September
4,2025.[Link]
o/SYCjDgAAQBAJ?hl=kn&gbpv=1&dq=task+of+theological+education&pg=PT134&pr
intsec=frontcover.
Clowdhury, Soummya, Nisarg Shah, Bharti Shah and Bakashish Singh. Artificial Intelligence
and Machine learning: Concepts, Tools, and Case Studies. 1st ed. Palwal, Haryana:
Chyren Publication, 2025.
Fisher, Elezabeth, and Linda Gray MacKay, Gender Justice: Women’s Rights are Human
Rights. Cambridge: Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, 1996.
13
Greig, Alastair, Frank Lewins, and Kevin White. Inequality in Australia. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Gutiérrez, Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation, Edited and
translated by Sister Caridad Inda and John Eagleson. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988.
Heitink, Gerben. Practical Theology History. Theory. Action: Manuel for Practical theology.
Translated by Reinder Bruinsma. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eermans
Publishing Company, 1999.
Kelan, Elisabeth, Patterns of Inclusion: How Gender Matters for Automation, Artificial
Intelligence and the Future of Work. London: Routledge, 2024.
Kunjumuhammed, Siraj Kariyilaparambu, Hisham Madi, and Mahmoud Abouraia, eds. Risks
and Challenges of AI-Driven Finance: Bias, Ethics, and Security. Hershey, PA: Business
Science Reference, an imprint of IGI Global, 2024.
Money, John, and Anke A. Ehrhardt. Man & Woman Boy & Girl: The Differentiation and
Dimorphism of Gender Identity from Conception to maturity. London: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1972. Accessed on September 4, 2025.
[Link]
Negevitsky, Michael. Artificial Intelligence: A Guide to Intelligent Systems, 2nd ed. Harlow,
England: Addison-Wesley, 2005.
North, Douclass C. Institutions, Institutional change and Economic performance. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Pilcher, Jane, and Imelda Whelehan. Fifty Key Concepts in Gender Studies. London: SAGE
Publications, 2004.
Thomas, M.M. Salvation and Humanisation: Some Crucial Issues of Mission in
Contemporary India. Madras: Christian Literature Society, 1971.
14
Wozna, Antonina. Mary Daly’s (1928-2010) Theological Method of Ontolinguistic
Hermeneutics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature, 2025.
Journals and Articles
Brown, Alana, Laurice Karkaby, mateja Perovic, Reema Shafi. “Sex and Gender Science:
The World Writes on the Body.” In Sex Differences in Brain Function and
Dysfunction. Edited by Claire Gibson and Liisa A. M. Galea, [Link]:
Springer, 2023.
Gebru, Timnit. “Race and gender.” In The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of AI. Edited by
Markus D. Dubber, Frank Pasquale, and Sunit Das, 253-270. New York: Oxford
University press, 2020.
Jamir, S.N. Among. “Gender Identities and Queer Lives: Envisioning a Rainbow
Community.” In LGBTQIA+Minorities and Identities for an Inclusive Community.
Edited by Aswathy John, 15-30. Serampore, West Bengal: SATHRI, 2005.
Katyal, Sonia K. and Jessica Y. Jung. “The Gender Panoptican: Al, Gender, and Design
Justice.” UCLA Law Review (January 2022): 137-221. Accessed on September 2, 2025.
[Link]
Keyes, Os. “The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Implications of Automatic Gender
Recognition.” Proceedings of the ACM on Human–Computer Interaction 2/88 CSCW
(2018): 1-22. [Link] Accessed on September 2, 2025.
Lamis, Liza B. “Empowering the Church for Gender Justice.” Christian Conference of Asia
XXIII/3 (2007): 28-34. Accessed on September 4, 2025, [Link]
03/07_liza28.pdf.
Mayer, Lawrence S. and Paul R. McHugh. “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the
Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences.” The New Atlantis: A Journal of
Technology & Society, no. 50 (2016): 10–143. Accessed on August 14, 2025,
[Link]
15
Schippers, Birit, “Just AI? Gender, Power, and Intersectional Discrimination.” In Artificial
Intelligence & Work: Transforming Work, Organizations, and Society in an Age of
Insecurity. Edited by John Bratton and Laura Steele, 111-132. London: Sage, 2025.
United Nations. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Accessed on September 2, 2025.
[Link]
World Health Organization. The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Sexual and Reproductive
Health and Rights: Technical Brief (March 2024): 1-13. Accessed on September 3,
2025. [Link]
Zwilling, Leonard, and Michael J. Sweet. “The Evolution of Third-Sex in Ancient India: A
Study in Ambiguity.” In Invented Identities: The Interplay of Gender and Politics in
India. Edited by Julia Leslie and Mary McGee, 99-132. New Delhi: Oxford University
Press, 2000.
16