The prevalence and impact of toxic discussions online have made content moderation crucial.Automated systems can play a vital role in identifying toxicity, and reducing the reliance on human moderation.Nevertheless, identifying toxic comments for diverse communities continues to present challenges that are addressed in this paper.The two-part goal of this study is to(1)identify intuitive variances from annotator disagreement using quantitative analysis and (2)model the subjectivity of these viewpoints.To achieve our goal, we published a new dataset\footnote{\url{https://github.com/XXX}} with expert annotators' annotations and used two other public datasets to identify the subjectivity of toxicity.Then leveraging the Large Language Model(LLM),we evaluate the model's ability to mimic diverse viewpoints on toxicity by varying size of the training data and utilizing same set of annotators as the test set used during model training and a separate set of annotators as the test set.We conclude that subjectivity is evident across all annotator groups, demonstrating the shortcomings of majority-rule voting. Moving forward, subjective annotations should serve as ground truth labels for training models for domains like toxicity in diverse communities.

There is a bidirectional relationship between culture and AI; AI models are increasingly used to analyse culture, thereby shaping our understanding of culture. On the other hand, the models are trained on collections of cultural artifacts thereby implicitly, and not always correctly, encoding expressions of culture. This creates a tension that both limits the use of AI for analysing culture and leads to problems in AI with respect to cultural complex issues such as bias. One approach to overcome this tension is to more extensively take into account the intricacies and complexities of culture. We structure our discussion using four concepts that guide humanistic inquiry into culture: subjectivity, scalability, contextuality, and temporality. We focus on these concepts because they have not yet been sufficiently represented in AI research. We believe that possible implementations of these aspects into AI research leads to AI that better captures the complexities of culture. In what follows, we briefly describe these four concepts and their absence in AI research. For each concept, we define possible research challenges.