A recent study revealed that while half of men say they use generative AI tools, only 37% of women use them.
It is not a small gap, nor is it something unimportant technical, it is a signal, one of those that when ignored, end up widening inequalities that were already there. ALL this, although it is not always said, weighs heavily.
Digital Divide: The Old Acquaintance That Repeats Itself Over and Over Again
By: Gabriel E. Levy B.
The study avoids quick explanations. It has nothing to do with age, or educational level, or income.
Many women feel that they are not prepared enough, look more carefully at risks, and worry more about privacy.
That “not being ready”, or “feeling prepared”, does not come out of nowhere, it is the result of a long history of exclusion, explicit or silent, from technological spaces.
Something that drags on, and it shows.
You don’t have to go far back in time to see similar patterns. When the internet began to become widespread in the nineties, the script was similar. Men occupied forums, blogs and programming spaces, while many women remained as passive users, or secondary users.
Something like this happened later with video games, cryptocurrencies or software development. EVERYTHING repeats itself, even if the tools change.
For years it was said that it was a matter of personal taste, almost as if there was a natural predisposition. However, later studies showed that the problem was not interest, but the lack of sustained and, above all, social inclusion.
Already in 2021, the World Economic Forum warned that, without active policies, closing the Gender Gap in tech jobs could take more than 130 years.
And that was before the explosion of generative AI, that is, the Boom.
Today the risk is that this distance will not only be maintained, but will be widened, both in access and in the benefits offered by this Technology.
More burden for the digital divide that is going down very slowly in Latam
The results of this study do not help at all in the indicators, on the contrary, they increase the already very marked Digital Divide in Latin America.
When it comes to the concept of the Digital Divide, it is important to address multiple dimensions, both academic and technical, since we are not referring to a particular phenomenon, but to the sum of consequences and asymmetries derived from the processes of technological implementation, in communities and social groups.
For Benjamin M. Compaine, author of the book The Digital Divide, the concept of
“Digital divide” refers to the perceived divide “between those who have access to contemporary information and communication technologies and those who do not”
which is why those who do not have this access end up being at an obvious economic and social disadvantage compared to others.
In practical terms, in the current historical moment, it is socially recognized as a determining factor to measure the digital divide: “The lack of access to the Internet”, either due to the absence of connectivity, the poor quality of this or due to the lack of knowledge in its use, these types of gaps being possibly the most studied and analyzed so far.
In South America, around 120 million people do not have access to the Internet in the region and approximately 302 million do. With 70% access and a ratio equivalent to 70/30. The figure for Central America and the Caribbean is similar with a ratio of 67/33.
Although at first glance the figures for Latin America do not seem to be as discouraging as those for Africa (27/73), there are other decisive variables that are not taken into account in many of the reports and statistics: Bandwidth, which in simple terms translates into connection speed.
Those who distrust the algorithm
The work published in ScienceDirect is based on the Survey of Consumer Expectations of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
There, people in the United States were consulted about the use of Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, DALL· E, Claude and others like it.
The differences are obvious, almost effortlessly. Not only do men use them more, but they also use them more often. Even among those who employ AI every week, the gap is still there, firm.
What is striking is that there are no major technical or educational differences.
About 75% of the gap is explained by self-perception, they believe they know more about artificial intelligence and, therefore, they are encouraged to use it.
In other words, the problem is not actual ability, but Trust!
The rest has to do with privacy concerns and mistrust of those who manage the data.
Something that, according to previous studies, is more common among women. Not out of paranoia, but because they have historically been more exposed to abuse, digital surveillance, or online harassment.
So the question is inevitable, why should they trust?
Staying Out Also Has a Cost
If AI is consolidated as the great productivity tool of the future, not using it is no longer a simple personal choice.
It becomes a Concrete Disadvantage, in wages, in job opportunities, in possibilities of promotion.
If companies start demanding AI skills, those who don’t feel prepared will be left behind, without much return.
And if that group is made up mostly of women, the wage gap is not going to close.
On the contrary, it could grow. Different studies show that the use of generative AI can increase productivity by around 14% in administrative tasks and is associated with greater business growth.
It is not a minor fact, not at all. The risk is that women will be left out not only of technological adoption, but also of the economic benefits it brings. This is already happening, and it happened many times tb.
They see it at work, even if it is hard to say
Personal experiences reflect this clearly.
Ana, a graphic designer at a medium-sized agency in Miami, says that since they started using Midjourney and similar tools, several colleagues deliver proposals in half the time.
She, on the other hand, feels that AI adds more stress than helps.
He worries about making mistakes, not knowing what data he is giving up, and not finding the time to learn well. “It exhausts me,” he sums up, just like that.
Something similar happens to Luisa, a high school teacher in Bogotá.
They know that there are tools to summarize texts, plan classes or generate materials, but they do not know where to start. In addition, he is worried about the idea that one day he will be told that his work can be done by a machine. That idea bothers us.
Meanwhile, Martín, his math colleague, already uses ChatGPT to correct exercises and create personalized content. And that, clearly, gives it an advantage.
These situations are repeated in offices, banks, the media and schools.
Many women feel that they must fully master a tool before using it.
Many men, on the other hand, try, fail, and try again.
The most paradoxical thing of all is that the same thing happened with programming or investments in Cryptocurrencies.
The difference is that now the cost of not being encouraged can be Employment itself.
Either they all learn, or the same ones win
Those who analyze these dynamics are beginning to see a clear risk.
If access to artificial intelligence is left in the hands of those who already have more confidence, more resources or more time to explore, the circle closes. And technology, instead of democratizing opportunities, ends up reinforcing inequalities. Just like that, bluntly.
Among the solutions proposed by the authors of the study are improving privacy regulation, offering accessible AI training and creating safe spaces for experimentation for women in digital environments.
But there is also a deeper challenge. Break with the idea that you have to know everything to get started.
Accept that making mistakes is part of the process. And to understand, once and for all, that technology is not neutral, neutral. Because it is not.
In conclusion, artificial intelligence is already part of the present, but not everyone is advancing at the same pace. While many men adopt these tools quickly, many women continue to doubt, distrust or remain on the sidelines. If we do not act in time, the gap will not only be technological, but also economic and social. And, once again, innovation will end up benefiting the usual ones.
References:1. The Atlantic web article:
Shellenberger, S. (2026, January). The AI Boyfriend: What women really want from artificial intimacy. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/family/2026/01/ai-boyfriend-women-gender/685315/
- Book by Benjamin M. Compaine:
Compaine, B. M. (2001). The digital divide: Facing a crisis or creating a myth? MIT Press.
