The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutras community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.
During the Q&A section of the Oculus Connect keynote panel, a woman stepped up to the microphone and asked a question
“What is Oculus’s approach to their clear gender gap and how you’re gonna not port that into VR?”
Palmer Luckey answered first, acknowledging that the gender gap existed and attributing it to the gender gap in the wider tech industry. He essentially said that, although Oculus doesn’t discriminate among applicants, not many women applied to attend Oculus Connect to begin with. John Carmack then answered as well, saying simply that “we are having a hard time hiring all the people that we want. It doesn’t matter what they look like.”
This exchange was then posted to the Oculus subreddit (/r/oculus) under the title “SJW vs John Carmack. (Carmack wins!)
” The link had a relatively low upvote ratio, but it was full of comments complaining that the woman had received any applause (“White knights are the worst”), decrying the influence of “social justice warriors” (“Fucking SJWs trying to cause shit out of anything”) and in one case condoning the harassment that the woman had received (“She should be harassed for being a fool. All fools, male or female, should be treated as such”). All of these comments had significant net upvotes at the time I wrote this.
As Palmer said, it's clear that the gender gap exists, and it's just as clear that the gap is not a good thing. VR is for everyone, and if a big group of people aren't becoming part of the community, for whatever reason, we should see that as a problem to be solved. The defensive reaction to the woman's question bothered me a lot, and I saw some of it in person as well, when a developer at the conference’s closing party complained that the woman was “getting all feminist about it”. Those of us in the VR community shouldn't be shutting down these kinds of questions. We shouldn’t be afraid to talk about how to close the gap, and we shouldn't intepret the question as an attack.
Frankly, I’m worried that VR is turning into a “guy space”, where women are made to feel less welcome. That’s not okay! I want to share the joys of VR with everyone, and so I don't want anyone to feel excluded.
Beyond that, what really worries me is that there are powerful feedback loops at play. If women see an existing gender gap, that alone might be enough to discourage them from working on VR. And if there’s no female perspective in the room, that can foster an even more unwelcoming environment in turn. (For example, would VR porn be talked about so often and in the same manner if there were an equal number of men and women in the conversation? I don’t think it would.) As Palmer argued, the existing VR gender gap is probably a holdover from the gap in the tech and games industry, or perhaps from the wider popular culture of technology. But I don’t want to end up with a male-dominated community just because of inertia, especially when the VR community is still small enough to change.
Palmer and John gave perfectly reasonable responses, but I think they were answering a different question. They made it clear that Oculus was not actively discriminating against women, but I took the question to be more about the gender gap in the VR community (as reflected in the crowd at Connect) rather than within Oculus itself, and that’s an issue that’s worth addressing as well.
To be clear, I agree with their answers, and I don’t think that Oculus is sexist. I’ve dealt with various branches of Oculus while developing my game, and the number of women from Oculus that I’ve worked with has been striking. Most of them exude so much sheer, obvious competence that I can only describe them as “badass”. Oculus is not the problem.
But Oculus can be part of the solution. No organization exerts more influence over the VR scene, and they could do a lot to foster a healthy and diverse community while still staying meritocratic. The panel’s answer was good, considering that it was off-the-cuff, but I wish they would have said something like: “We agree, the gender gap is a problem. It’s a tough thing to solve, especially considering the wider issues with gender in the technology world, but we hope to set a good example at Oculus, and we want to make it clear that VR is for everybody. You’re welcome here.”
Almost all of my experiences with the VR community have been positive ones, and /r/oculus has always been a fantastic subreddit (perhaps excepting the day of the Facebook acquisition, but that’s a whole different story). I don’t think that the folks complaining about the woman’s question on Reddit are necessarily sexist or otherwise bad people. But I do think that we’re in danger of unintentionally becoming a monolithic, exclusive community, and I don’t want to see that happen. When someone asks a question about the gender gap, we should take the question seriously and share their concern. It’s not an attack.
VR is awesome. Let’s not shut the door behind us!