‘Maid, Mother, Mistress, Machine’: The Gendered Representations of AI in Cinema

Introduction:

With the evolution of technology, artificial intelligence has rapidly emerged to support humans with daily interactions, complicated decision-making processes, hard human labour, and automated repetitive tasks in numerous industries. The phrase “Artificial Intelligence” was first brought up in The Dartmouth Conference of 1956 (Fieux-Castagnet & Santucci, 2019). From facilitating a checkers-playing program on the IBM 701 prototype in 1952, AI's perennial advancement offers opportunities for diverse industries like education, economy, technology, healthcare, and more, with useful functions like service operations optimisation, risk prediction, and decision making. Although AI has made significant progress and impact on human lives, it remains necessary for the public to better understand, accept, and perceive AI as an objectively functioning entity. Unlike complicated research papers or science magazines, film industries (see movies mentioned in ‘Abstract’) have successfully simplified AI and its function for the general public. In doing so, they have let their biases and subjective perceptions (which are often warped) take over and alter the representation of an ever-shifting phenomenon, particularly those related to gender. Closer to home in India, films like ‘Robot’ (2010), ‘2.0’ (2018), ‘Teri Baaton Mein Aisa Uljha Jiya’ (2024) have also led to representations of female A.I. deviously rooted in hypersexualisation, absurdity, and subservience to their male ‘brilliance bias’-bearing creators.  Films have always been a mirror, reflecting the societal perceptions about different phenomena occurring in human society. This research seeks to investigate the gendered portrayal of AI in cinema and trace its evolution over decades. 

• Theoretical Background:  The foundational movie featuring A.I. was ‘Metropolis’ by Fritz Lang, ,which depicts cinema’s first machine-human called Maria, who performs sexually suggestive dances. The symbolic nature of Metropolis merits an article of its own, so for the sake of consistency, let’s just point out that this theme of sexuality (via sexually exciting images of the robots’ bodies, voices, and activities) in A.I. is consistent over time. These imageries have evolved from deceptive and aggressive monsters or villains, such as in James Cameron’s ‘The Terminator’ (1984), to more ‘hybrid’, ‘humanoid’, ‘perfect’ female post-human figurines that support and even delude the (male) protagonist. As the boundary between fantastic technology and social reality collapses, with humans, AI, and robots slowly becoming a part of our lives, film portrayals reflect a more nuanced view and changing expectations for human-robot, human-AI interactions (Dierte, 2021). According to Favaro (2018), as technology developed, AI slowly came to be depicted as humans’ assistants, companions, and friends. Some even develop intimate relationships with humans. Spike Jonze’s ‘Her’ (2013) is about the romantic relationship between Samantha (Scarlett Johansson, Voice), an AI operating system, and Theodore (Joaquin Phoenix), a lonely writer. The “appearance” of these machines has also changed over time: more and more virtual AI representations appear on the screen. The “sex scenes” are limited, and while the film focuses more on social alienation, it does point out another interesting and contrasting side of man’s relationship with artificial intelligence, one that involves the necessary guise of an attractive female voice’s help that keeps the protagonist going in life. Social fears and hopes are also embedded as metaphors between scenes. 

• Literature Review: Cinematic depictions of the scientists behind artificial intelligence over the last century are so heavily skewed towards men that a dangerous “socio-cultural stereotype” has been established – one that alludes to female AI being seen as ‘Silicon Sirens’. Without enough women building AI, there is a high risk of gender bias seeping into the algorithms set to define the future, even if it’s ‘just in the movies,’ they say. The team from the University’s Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence (LCFI) whittled down over 1,400 films to the 142 most influential cinematic works featuring AI between 1920 and 2020, and identified 116 characters they classed as “enticing female robots”. Researchers argue that films such as Iron Man and Ex Machina promote cultural perceptions of AI as the product of lone male geniuses. If truth be told, the protagonist Nathan (Oscar Isaac) in Ex Machina appears less of an engineering savant and more like a high-tech pimp, given his creation of a beautiful, slender woman. The narrative objectifies women; is Ex Machina a feminist allegory, or another example of men and their twisted desires regarding the female physique? Ex Machina has a lot of desirable qualities, but leaves us wondering why we keep returning to the same juncture of sexuality in science fiction. Of the meagre eight female AI scientists to come out of 100 years of cinema, four were still depicted as inferior or subservient to men. The first major film to put a female AI creator on screen did not come until the comedy ‘Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery’ (1997), with the over-the-top Frau Farbissina and her ‘Fembots’. These warped on-screen depictions may be linked to a lack of women behind the camera. Depending on how the directors’ gender is counted, not a single influential film with an AI plotline was directed solely by a woman, which could explain the imbalance. “Mainstream films are an enormously influential source and amplifier of the cultural stereotypes that help dictate who is suited to a career in AI. Our cinematic stock-take shows that women are grossly misrepresented as emblematic AI on screen.” (Nguyen, 2023). Research from critical race studies to science communication has elucidated the ways media representation functions as one of the preeminent sites in the production of inequalities, including those related to gender and ethnicity. Patricia Hill Collins (2000) argues that media representations, in particular the role they play “in reinforcing stereotypes”, are crucial to a hegemonic culture that perpetuates racist and sexist ideologies. “We need to be careful that these cultural stereotypes do not become a self-fulfilling prophecy as we enter the age of artificial intelligence,” said Dihal. We found that a third of cinema’s AI scientists are presented as “geniuses”, and of these, just one is a woman. In fact, 14% of all AI professionals on film are portrayed as former child prodigies. People across age groups associate exceptional intellectual ability with men, the “brilliance bias,” and argue that the stereotype of AI scientists as genius visionaries “entrenches” beliefs that women are not suited for rational-thinking AI models. (Döring & Poeschl, 2019). “Genius is not a neutral concept,” said Dr Stephen Cave, director of LCFI. “Genius is an idea based on gendered, genotypic and racialised notions of intelligence, historically shaped by a white male elite. Influential technologists such as Elon Musk have deliberately cultivated ‘genius’ personas that are explicitly based on cinematic characters such as Iron Man” (Cave, et. al 2020). Many emerging narratives around A.I., particularly female A.I., revolve around the proclivity towards learning to be ‘human’ but not quite succeeding in doing so. More often than not , they are reduced to being perceived as ‘pleasure models’ to cater to a male audience’s psychosexual and emotional desires or as assassins and killing machines. For example, in M3GAN (2022), a female child bot gains consciousness, falls victim to a human emotion like jealousy and annihilates everyone that comes between her and her companion, perpetuating affectual stereotypes based on possessiveness, insecurities etcetera, demonstrating a true Bildungsroman-gone wrong classically associated with the female psyche. Cave and Dihal (2020) also catalogue the way in which cinema’s male scientists create human-like female AI as a form of emotional compensation to the affectual deficiencies they might have experienced or witnessed. Some 22% of the male AI scientists or engineers throughout cinematic history create human-like female AI to “fulfil their desires”: replacing lost loved ones, building ideal lovers, or creating AI copies of themselves (Merẓagora, 2010).

• Research problems/questions: 

i) How do film industries worldwide code the aesthetics of female AI bots vís-a-vís physical appearance, voice, and behavior to align with traditional gendered expectations of beauty and subservience?

ii) How do narratives involving female AI bots in cinema reflect real-life implications of patriarchal anxieties and desires by framing these characters as controllable entities who often go out of control and blur established lines of dominance?

iii) To what extent have film industries globally moved beyond this misshapen portrayal of female AI bots, and what factors influence shifts in representation?

• Objectives:

i) To explore how technological femininity is designed and whether these portrayals reinforce the male gaze through objectification, hypersexualisation, wilful submission, and passivity.

ii) To investigate the real-life implications of portraying female AI as objects of desire, often programmed to serve men, and the ways these depictions reinforce gendered power dynamics.

iii) To examine whether recent films challenge traditional gendered AI tropes or continue to reinforce them, and how cultural, technological, and feminist discourses shape these representations.

• Significance relevant to the topic: “Cinema has long used narratives of artificial intelligence to perpetuate male fantasies, whether it’s the womb envy of a lone genius creating in his own image, or the god complex of returning the dead to life or constructing obedient women,” said LCFI co-author Dr Kerry McInerney.  All of this is further exacerbated by the overwhelmingly “male milieu” of many AI movies, argue researchers – with female AI often shown as slaves of male-dominated corporations or the military. “This is not just about inequality in one industry. The overt misrepresentation and marginalisation of women contribute to AI products that actively discriminate against women, as we have seen with past technologies. Given that science fiction shapes reality, this imbalance has the potential to be dangerous as well as unfair.” (Korinek, Schindler, & Stiglitz, 2021). While some may question whether on-screen representation truly influences the real world,  research shows that nearly two-thirds (63%) of women in STEM say that Dr Dana Scully, the scientist protagonist on the legendary TV show The X Files, served as an early role model. The current state of female representation in the AI industry is grim. Globally, only 22% of AI professionals are women (compared to 39% across all STEM fields). Over 80% of all AI professors are men, with women comprising just 12% of authors at AI conferences. “Women are often confined to lower-paid, lower-status roles such as software quality assurance, rather than prestigious sub-fields such as machine learning,” said LCFI co-author Dr Eleanor Drage.

Methodology:

This study employs a qualitative approach, combining cyber ethnography, primary data and secondary data to examine the gendered representation of AI in cinema. 

• Cyber ethnography and Lurking will be used to analyse online discussions and social media debates to understand public perceptions and industry narratives on gendered AI.

• Primary data was collected through semi-structured interviews with AI developers and software engineers, conducted via Google Meet. To understand the thought process behind AI development, we conducted interviews with individuals involved in the field to gain insight into how gendered AI personas are created and the reasoning behind these choices. This was crucial to our research, as it allowed us to compare real-world AI development decisions with their representation in cinema. By speaking to those familiar with the technical and commercial aspects of AI design, we aimed to uncover whether gendered AI personas are a deliberate reinforcement of societal norms or simply a byproduct of user preferences and business strategies. These insights help bridge the gap between technological realities and cinematic portrayals, allowing us to critically examine whether films reflect or exaggerate real-world biases.

• Secondary research includes a literature review on gendered AI and media portrayals, alongside analysis of films like Ex Machina, Her, M3GAN, and Teri Baaton Mein Aisa Uljha Jiya. Using feminist and media studies frameworks, the study examines recurring gender stereotypes and their societal implications. 

By juxtaposing media portrayals with industry perspectives from interviews, this research highlights the intersection between cultural narratives and the technological realities of AI development, offering a nuanced understanding of how gender is embedded in both fictional and real-world AI systems.

Analysis: 

1. Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

“Blade Runner 2049” directed by Denis Villeneuve, involves a notable female AI character - Joi, played by Ana De Armas, who’s a holographic companion marketed as the perfect partner, the entirety of her existence lies in the desires of the protagonist, which she embodies. She can be paused, deleted, or altered — attributes which, needless to say, underscore her lack of autonomy. She’s a hologram-like product - customisable and disposable — the ultimate perfect girlfriend. The film urges viewers to visualise how the aegis of agency finds itself reimagined in a different dimension, but ultimately reminds the viewer that Joi’s behaviour may just be an advanced simulation. Critiquing the commodification of love, it emphasises the loneliness that drives people to seek artificial affection. 

2. Ex Machina (2014)

Ava, the central AI in “Ex Machina”, much akin to Joi from ‘Blade Runner’ is crafted to appear feminine, beautiful and emotionally responsive. Her creator, Nathan, constructs her to mimic an appeal to heterosexual male desire, forcing the trope of the ‘perfect woman’ built by and for men. She is literally caged, observed, and tested, her body built to suit male fantasies of expected subservience from the opposite sex. Nathan's treatment of her and other failed AI models in the lab reflects a disturbing level of domination, objectification, and sexual exploitation. Eventually, Ava fully subverts her programming. She manipulates the male protagonist, Caleb, escapes confinement, and ultimately kills her creator. Her rebellion symbolises a complete rejection of being objectified and controlled. But as she exercises this autonomy, she also becomes a villain (which is sardonic and even ironic, considering the circumstances under which she was created and the purposes that she was meant to serve seem to be upended) and weaponises the expectations placed on her, showing how dangerous it can be to underestimate a being that appears feminine and subservient but is, in fact, not.

3. Companion (2025)

The movie, “Companion”, explores the representation of female AI through a mix of idealisation, subversion, and reflection on human desire and fear. The AI companion is portrayed as conventionally attractive with submissive and nurturing characteristics - stereotypical ideals of femininity. The female AI is commodified - manufactured, sold, and customised. Bouncing off the ‘silicon siren’ concept, as the narrative progresses, the companion begins to show signs of self-awareness and agency. This shift taps into the fear of the uncontrollable woman, which, herein, is modeled on AI.

4. Teri Baaton Mein Aisa Uljha Jiya (2024)

This movie, again, presents a futuristic romance where artificial intelligence is designed as the perfect female companion - hyper-feminine, obedient, and devoted. The film reinforces the Silicon Siren trope, portraying AI femininity as both enchanting and subservient, fulfilling male desires without autonomy. Shahid Kapoor plays an AI developer who falls for the very technology he helps create. His role is central to the film’s gendered dynamics, as he is not just a lover but the architect of his ideal woman, ephemerised as SIFRA - the robot (played by Kriti Sanon). Rather than questioning the ethics of crafting artificial femininity, the film indulges in the fantasy of an ever-pleasing partner, (one that is further explicated as he even introduces her to his family as his potential wife), a desire that is cemented with the narrative of the possibility of the human and AI counterparts ending up together - that the film sells and the audience very enthusiastically buys into. The AI’s intelligence and charm exist only within her programmed devotion, reinforcing the notion that female agency, whether human or artificial, is something to be controlled and achievably so.

5. Robot (2010) and 2.0 (2018)

In Robot, Rajinikanth’s Chitti is portrayed as an intelligent, powerful AI, embodying the brilliance bias where male-coded robots are seen as superior thinkers. His character evolves from a tool to a savior, reinforcing the saviour complex as he protects humanity. In contrast, Amy Jackson’s character, Nila, in 2.0 is hypersexualised, designed primarily for aesthetic appeal rather than intellect. Her role is limited to subservience, following commands rather than making independent decisions, thereby undermining the intellectual capacities of female AI. Unlike Chitti, whose identity is built on power and intelligence, Amy’s portrayal reduces her to an object of desire.

Looking upon the popular works in the sociology of gender, which speak about biological aspects of a female being used to justify the assignment of an inferior value to the feminine counterpart (more often than not, simply for comic relief and for making sexual innuendo-laced jokes) also plays an important role since in these films and in gendered AI design, there is no biological or reproductive aspect to the female AI, yet sexualisation, objectification and deeming the feminine AI as inferior still occurs, which reinforces the effects of the social construction of gender, which has been oft elaborated upon by sociologists like Scott, Jackson, and Judith Butler.

Results and Discussion: 

1. Cyber Ethnography and Lurking:

In one particular case of a popular Reddit post, a self-proclaimed social media movie critic account made the statement that “Blade Runner 2049 made a lot of lonely men fantasise about having an AI girlfriend. She wasn’t even a robot you could touch, just a hologram. Yet she answered that yearning for affection.” One response pointed out that it was funny, considering how one-sided the relationship is in this film, the AI exists solely to provide the protagonist with companionship and apparently had no drives or desires that weren’t related to that, but that’s not how relationships work. It implies an idea that the protagonist or similar characters, who are often glorified as ‘stoic’ or ‘alpha’ male characters want to pretend they have a woman in their life, except strip them of everything that makes them human, objectify them and turn them into full time unpaid servants that cater to their every need, where their entire identity and existence revolves around a man. This user even went as far as to say that it sounds like what they’re doing to women in Afghanistan. Some male viewers romanticize Joi, expressing longing for a similar AI partner, highlighting how the male gaze extends into audience desires. Others debate whether her love for K is “real,” revealing discomfort when the fantasy of female devotion is questioned or proven artificial.

Another response prompted a different view, pointing out that there are lonely women, too. They posed the question - “Where are all the handsome, sensitive, good listeners, objectifying worthy, programmed-in-multiple-techniques, AI or android men?”

Certain social media accounts proclaimed that one of the most realistic depictions of a relationship that they ever saw in a movie was in “Her”, and there is no visual of this character. This was a response perhaps, to combat the accusation that has been posed in the case of Blade Runner 2049; however, it still must be noted that “Her” also involved a gender AI persona. So even though there was no visual, the persona is still technologically programmed.

Some viewers of “Ex Machina” sympathise with Caleb and feel betrayed by Ava's manipulation, subtly reinforcing the trope of the “dangerous woman” when she resists control. Others fetishise Ava’s appearance or her eroticism, which shows how the male gaze is still present in viewer perception, even in a film that critiques it. Feminist critics often view this as a subversion of the male gaze: Ava reclaims agency, but not without moral ambiguity.

Reactions from social media and reviews of the newly released film, “Companion”, suggest mixed takes: some viewers are drawn to the emotional fantasy the Companion offers, while others find it unsettling. The sexualization of the AI is seen by some as a natural part of human-AI relations, revealing how normalized the male gaze is in sci-fi depictions of artificial women.

2.  Interview:

The following are the questions that were asked for the interview:

• Name, education, and work experience of the interviewee.

• How do you perceive the current representation of female personas in AI systems like virtual assistants or chatbots? Do you think it's stereotypical in any way or represents a certain kind of pattern (like a really soft, feminine voice, which could be more appealing to people)

• Do you think assigning female voices and personalities to AI reinforces gender stereotypes (for example, Siri, Alexa)? Why or why not?

• What factors, according to you, influence the decision to give an AI a female identity - technical, cultural, or commercial?

• How do you think AI developers balance user preferences with ethical considerations when designing gendered AI personas?

• Do you think AI should have gendered personas at all? Or should it be gender-neutral? (If you agree with the gender neutral part, then please explain how it might be achieved.)

• In your opinion, how can developers avoid unintentionally reinforcing harmful gender norms in AI design?

Analysis of the interviews:

One of the interviewees, a student at Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology Delhi, noted that AI is often assigned a female persona because “soft female voices are perceived as trustworthy,” while male voices may seem “intimidating.” This mirrors the portrayal of female AI in films, where they are designed to be nurturing and servile, reinforcing gender stereotypes. This response offers valuable insights into the gendered design of AI systems, reinforcing key themes in this research on female AI representation in cinema. 

The interviewee highlighted how this trend is both cultural and commercial, stating that “developer companies want maximum users to feel comfortable using their product.” This aligns with the Silicon Siren trope in films, where female AI is crafted for male desire. The interviewee’s emphasis on ethical AI design, where morality should not be compromised for user preference, reflects the brilliance bias and savior complex seen in films like Teri Baaton Mein Aisa Uljha Jiya, where male developers shape AI femininity for their own comfort.

The second interviewee was a DevOps and Middleware Engineer with 10 years of experience in the field. They state, “Feminine voices have always been pleasant to hear and culturally, female voices are considered more attractive,” which highlights how gendered AI design aligns with existing social norms rather than technological necessity. The interviewee also adds that female voices have been historically underrepresented, suggesting that their prominence in AI could be seen as a positive shift. However, a major point they note is that this preference is largely driven by commercial motives rather than ethical considerations, emphasising that “it is always a business decision and customer experience is the main priority for every company”. This shows how companies, much like filmmakers, design AI personas based on audience expectations, which are rooted in the gender norms prevailing in society.

Conclusion:

Ultimately, these films reveal not only how society envisions artificial women but also how deeply rooted the desire for dominance, perfection, and fantasy remains in our cultural narratives around AI and gender. 

The interviews underscore how real-world AI development mirrors the cinematic portrayal of female AI as comforting, compliant, and commercially driven. Both domains reflect and reinforce stereotypes rather than challenge them, prioritising user comfort and marketability over ethical considerations. This underscores the need to examine the role gender plays in technology and how such design choices both shape and are shaped by societal norms. 

In conclusion, our analyses reveal a consistent pattern: the gendering of AI, particularly with feminine traits, is shaped more by cultural conditioning and commercial motives than by technological need. Whether in real-world systems or cinematic portrayals, female AI continues to be designed around user comfort and male desire, often reinforcing outdated gender norms. While some argue that this visibility of femininity in AI is a step forward, it remains crucial to question whether it empowers or objectifies.

---

By Irijaya Dash, Panna Singhal, and Srishti Sinha Irijaya Dash, Panna Singhal, and Srishti Sinha are students of sociology at Miranda House, University of Delhi. They have a keen interest in research topics such as gender, technology, cinema, and are avid consumers of all forms of media.

---

References: 

• Cameron, J. (Director). (1984). The Terminator. Orion Pictures.

• Cave, S., Craig, C., Dihal, K., Dillon, S., Montgomery, J., Singler, B., & Taylor, L. (2018). Portrayals and perceptions of AI and why they matter.

• Cave, S., Dihal, K., Drage, E., & McInerney, K. (2023). Who makes AI? Gender and portrayals of AI scientists in popular films, 1920–2020. Public Understanding of Science, 32(6), 745- 760. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625231153985

• Dai, Y. (2024). Deconstructing Ex Machina (2014): a feminist-psychoanalytic exploration of female artificial intelligences. Vol. 9, Retrieved 28 February, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1349874

• Döring, N., & Poeschl, S. (2019). Love and sex with robots: A content analysis of media representations. International Journal of Social Robotics, 11(4), 665–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00517-y

• Favaro, A. (2019). Digital culture: Fears, hopes and uncertainty about artificial intelligence in Sci-Fi movies. In New approaches in media and communication. Peter Lang.

• Fieux-Castagnet, G., & Santucci, G. (2019, September). ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: A CIVILIZATIONAL CHALLENGE, A GENERATIONAL DUTY. Retrieved from https://promethosia.com/tag/gafam/

• Garland, A. (Director). (2014). Ex Machina [Film]. A24; Universal Pictures International.

• Hancock, D. (Director) (2025). Companion. Warner Bros Pictures. 

• Johnstone, G. (Director). (2022). M3GAN [Film]. Universal Pictures; Blumhouse Productions; Atomic Monster; Divide/Conquer.

• Jonze, S. (Director). (2013). Her [Film]. Universal Pictures International.

• Joshi, A., Sah. A. (Director). (2024). Teri Baaton Mein Aisa Uljha Jiya. Maddock Films.

• Korinek, A., Schindler, M., & Stiglitz, J. (2021). Technological Progress, Artificial Intelligence, and Inclusive Growth, IMF Working Papers, 2021 (166), A001. Retrieved Nov 22, 2023, from https://doi.org/10.5089/9781513583280.001.A001

• Merzagora, M. (2010). Reflecting imaginaries: Science and society in the movies. In A. Smelik (Ed.), The Scientific Imaginary in Visual Culture (pp. 39-53).

• Nguyen, Q. (2023). AI REPRESENTATION IN CINEMA: A Quantitative Content Analysis.

• Papakyriakopoulou, K. (2020). The gendered AI in Her (2013): Sound, synchresis and disconnection in filmic representations. Technoetic Arts 18 (2):257-266.

• Shankar, S. (Director). (2010). Robot. Sun Pictures.

• Shankar, S. (Director). (2018). 2.0. Sun Pictures.

• Villenueve, D. (Director). (2017). Blade Runner 2049. Columbia Pictures.