In a scene that could have been lifted from Bring It On—the 2000 film in which a white cheerleading captain discovers her squad’s championship-winning routine was stolen from a Black cheerleading team—another real-life instance of digital appropriation has emerged. This time, the culprit is white influencer Lauren Blake, who commands 1.6 million followers across social media. Blake was recently exposed for taking a photograph of Black model Tatiana Elizabeth at the 2024 U.S. Open, outfit, accessories, background, and all, and using artificial intelligence to swap her own face onto Elizabeth’s body. Blake then reposted the altered image as though it depicted her own attendance at the Miami Open. The act, which effectively erased Elizabeth’s identity while appropriating her likeness, has drawn widespread condemnation.

When Elizabeth publicly called attention to the theft, the ensuing backlash was swift and severe. Yet rather than issue an unqualified admission of wrongdoing, such as acknowledging that she had stolen a Black woman’s image and passed it off as her own, Blake offered a defense reminiscent of a tech entrepreneur deflecting blame onto automation. Her explanation, in essence, was that an AI program was responsible for the face swap, and that she bore no intentional malice.

This pattern of behavior, in which a white creator profits from the visual labor of a Black creator while simultaneously erasing her, is not merely an isolated lapse in judgment. It is digital colonization in its most transparent form, and it warrants serious examination.

Tatiana Elizabeth’s own words

The sequence of events, as detailed by Tatiana Elizabeth herself, is as follows. Elizabeth originally captured a photograph of herself at the 2024 U.S. Open—an image that reflected her own body, personal style, and environment. Last week, however, Blake’s Instagram account published a nearly identical image. The clothing, accessories, and background were the same. The sole difference was that Elizabeth’s face had been replaced with Blake’s via artificial intelligence, and the location caption had been altered to suggest the photo was taken at the Miami Open.

Elizabeth discovered the post, left a comment on it, and waited for an acknowledgment or apology. None was forthcoming. In response, she released a public video statement that has since been cited as a compelling case study in digital ethics and creator rights.

@tatiana.elizabethh it’s getting weird I’m moving to mars #fyp #greenscreen ♬ original sound – Whitney Leavitt

“Castrated me.” She used the word castrated because that is exactly what this feels like. Removing someone’s identity, their face, their agency, and pasting your own over it like a colonial flag.

The AI excuse

Turning now to Lauren Blake’s statement to TMZ, which functions less as a genuine apology and more as a carefully constructed exercise in deflection. Blake stated:

“That shouldn’t have happened, and I take full responsibility. This came from an A.I. content system my team uses to generate images at scale. I did not see the original image or intentionally set out to copy anyone’s work, but that doesn’t change the outcome.”

The claim that her team deploys an AI system “to generate images at scale” raises immediate questions about the nature of her content operation. If a human being with editorial oversight did not review the image before it was published to an audience of 1.6 million followers, that itself constitutes a failure of responsibility that contradicts her assertion of “taking full responsibility.” Furthermore, the notion that this highly specific face-swap, matching Blake’s face to Elizabeth’s body against the identical tennis backdrop, was the result of an accidental algorithmic output rather than a deliberate user prompt strains credulity. This was not a generic glitch. It was a targeted replacement of one person’s identity with another’s.

The fact that Blake now promises to “personally approve” all future content implies that she has not been doing so previously. Either she has been willfully detached from her own account’s output, or she is now offering a hollow pledge to perform basic oversight that should have existed from the start. Neither interpretation reflects well on her, and both serve as a damning commentary on the broader influencer ecosystem, where authenticity is often outsourced, and accountability is retroactive at best.

The racial dynamics nobody wants to name

One of the more revealing details in this affair is how TMZ chose to frame the two parties involved. The outlet’s headline referenced “White Influencer Lauren Blake” by full name, yet referred to Tatiana Elizabeth merely as “a Black model.” Her name is Tatiana Elizabeth. This is not an incidental omission. It is erasure. First, Elizabeth’s likeness was digitally removed from her own body. Then, her identity was stripped from the press coverage. Meanwhile, the white influencer who appropriated her image was granted a prominent platform to deflect blame onto artificial intelligence.

This raises a legitimate psychological and cultural question. Why do some women repeatedly superimpose their faces onto the bodies of Black women, women they clearly admire enough to imitate, yet never acknowledge? The answer is not complicated. It is envy dressed in the residue of white supremacist conditioning. Society has long told women like Lauren Blake that they represent the pinnacle of beauty, class, and grace.

When confronted with a Black woman like Tatiana Elizabeth or Meghan Sussex, who are visibly stunning, successful, and, inconveniently for the comparison, aging with a quality that defies the panic-driven skincare routines of their white peers, the cognitive dissonance becomes unbearable. Unable to compete, the response is not self-reflection but replacement. Not admiration but annexation. This is theft, and it is envy. And it is not an AI glitch.

Final thoughts

Lauren Blake claims she is “listening and appreciates” the public discourse. What she actually appreciates is the soft landing TMZ provided her. No direct apology has been issued to Tatiana Elizabeth. No financial restitution has been offered. Blake has not even typed Elizabeth’s name into a tweet. A repeat offense is likely. That pattern is familiar by now. The problem is not the artificial intelligence program. The problem is the person operating the mouse.

And until society starts naming the Tatiana Elizabeths of the world instead of giving grace to the Lauren Blakes, this digital colonization will continue. Say her name: Tatiana Elizabeth. Drive traffic to her page. And let Lauren Blake’s AI generate some shame for once.

Discover more from Feminegra

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.