No, I'm asserting that it's inconsistent (based on studying these sorts of purportedly "egalitarian" racial/gender ideologies). Anyone is welcome to make a counterargument.

> lots of people would completely disagree with that

I know. And I find their justifications fascinating, as previously mentioned.

> then you're pretending like it's obvious and not up for debate.

In many ways it is obvious. "Racism isn't racism if it targets $RACE people" is one variation of a popular slogan. In any case, as mentioned several times now, my position is "yes, more debate", yours is "debate is pointless".

> More fanning the flames. Why?

I'm not "fanning flames", I'm inviting debate. And as previously mentioned, I find the debate interesting. Incidentally it also tends to publicize the inconsistencies in the ideology, which is a nice side effect.