# Newer Is Not Fairer: Gender Stereotyping in Text-to-Image AI Across Model Generations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.18007 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.18007/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 8 of its 13 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.06520/) (2016)
- [Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.04359/) (2021)
- [Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraints](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.09457/) (2017)
- [Easily Accessible Text-to-Image Generation Amplifies Demographic Stereotypes at Large Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.03759/) (2022)
- [DALL-Eval: Probing the Reasoning Skills and Social Biases of Text-to-Image Generation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.04053/) (2022)
- [Fair Diffusion: Instructing Text-to-Image Generation Models on Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.10893/) (2023)
- [The Creativity of Text-to-Image Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.02904/) (2022)
- [Multimodal Composite Association Score: Measuring Gender Bias in Generative Multimodal Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.13855/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Text-to-image generative models are widely used in professional and creative settings, yet how they represent gender across occupations -- and whether newer models are fairer -- remains poorly understood across multiple generations. We evaluate gender representation across 20 occupations, 5 prompt templates, and 4 Stable Diffusion model generations (SD 1.5, SD 2.1, SDXL, SD 3 Medium), generating 8,000 images with n = 100 per occupation-model cell (5 prompts x 20 images), and classifying all with DeepFace. Across the 8,000 open-source images, 76.4% show male subjects (95% CI [75.1%, 78.7%], p < 2.2 x 10^-16, Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted). More strikingly, 57.6% of images for historically female-coded occupations show male subjects (raw p = 3.43 x 10^-22, BH-adjusted p = 1.71 x 10^-21). All nine significant tests reported in this paper survive BH correction across 10 tests. When compared against U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics workforce data, models underrepresent women by 20-46pp on average, with particularly large deviations for near gender-balanced occupations: scientist (48% female in BLS, 82-99% male in model outputs) and cleaner (46% female in BLS, 80-92% male in outputs). Model generations do not improve steadily: bias worsens from SD 1.5 to SDXL before partially recovering in SD 3 Medium. A preliminary comparison with GPT-image-1 on five occupations suggests lower bias than open-source models, though the practical effect is small (Cramer's V = 0.080) and the comparison is exploratory. No model achieves gender parity.