Gender bias in pretrained language models (PLMs) poses significant social and ethical challenges. Despite growing awareness, there is a lack of comprehensive investigation into how different models internally represent and propagate such biases. This study adopts an information-theoretic approach to analyze how gender biases are encoded within various encoder-based architectures.We focus on three key aspects: identifying how models encode gender information and biases, examining the impact of bias mitigation techniques and fine-tuning on the encoded biases and their effectiveness, and exploring how model design differences influence the encoding of biases.Through rigorous and systematic investigation, our findings reveal a consistent pattern of gender encoding across diverse models. Surprisingly, debiasing techniques often exhibit limited efficacy, sometimes inadvertently increasing the encoded bias in internal representations while reducing bias in model output distributions. This highlights a disconnect between mitigating bias in output distributions and addressing its internal representations. This work provides valuable guidance for advancing bias mitigation strategies and fostering the development of more equitable language models.

Numerous debiasing techniques have been proposed to mitigate the gender bias that is prevalent in pretrained language models. These are often evaluated on datasets that check the extent to which the model is gender-neutral in its predictions. Importantly, this evaluation protocol overlooks the possible adverse impact of bias mitigation on useful gender knowledge. To fill this gap, we propose **DiFair**, a manually curated dataset based on masked language modeling objectives. **DiFair** allows us to introduce a unified metric, *gender invariance score*, that not only quantifies a model’s biased behavior, but also checks if useful gender knowledge is preserved. We use **DiFair** as a benchmark for a number of widely-used pretained language models and debiasing techniques. Experimental results corroborate previous findings on the existing gender biases, while also demonstrating that although debiasing techniques ameliorate the issue of gender bias, this improvement usually comes at the price of lowering useful gender knowledge of the model.