The widespread application of Large Language Models (LLMs) involves ethical risks for users and societies. A prominent ethical risk of LLMs is the generation of unfair language output that reinforces or exacerbates harm for members of disadvantaged social groups through gender biases (Weidinger et al., 2022; Bender et al., 2021; Kotek et al., 2023). Hence, the evaluation of the fairness of LLM outputs with respect to such biases is a topic of rising interest. To advance research in this field, promote discourse on suitable normative bases and evaluation methodologies, and enhance the reproducibility of related studies, we propose a novel approach to database construction. This approach enables the assessment of gender-related biases in LLM-generated language beyond merely evaluating their degree of neutralization.

The rapid adoption of large language models (LLMs) in recommender systems (RS) presents new challenges in understanding and evaluating their biases, which can result in unfairness or the amplification of stereotypes. Traditional fairness evaluations in RS primarily focus on collaborative filtering (CF) settings, which may not fully capture the complexities of LLMs, as these models often inherit biases from large, unregulated data. This paper proposes a normative framework to benchmark consumer fairness in LLM-powered recommender systems (RecLLMs). We critically examine how fairness norms in classical RS fall short in addressing the challenges posed by LLMs. We argue that this gap can lead to arbitrary conclusions about fairness, and we propose a more structured, formal approach to evaluate fairness in such systems. Our experiments on the MovieLens dataset on consumer fairness, using in-context learning (zero-shot vs. few-shot) reveal fairness deviations in age-based recommendations, particularly when additional contextual examples are introduced (ICL-2). Statistical significance tests confirm that these deviations are not random, highlighting the need for robust evaluation methods. While this work offers a preliminary discussion on a proposed normative framework, our hope is that it could provide a formal, principled approach for auditing and mitigating bias in RecLLMs. The code and dataset used for this work will be shared at "gihub-anonymized".