Loren, I’ve really had enough of your mansplanations. You simply refuse to believe that everything you have achieved was not solely through your own efforts. You have yours and you delude yourself that everyone else had the same opportunities and that racism never gave you a helping hand up. I absolutely believe that you have the aptitude to do well enough in your chosen field. It is not your fault that the history we were all taught ignored so completely the substantial contributions to math and science and computer science and coding that were made by women and people of color, those you state over and over simply lack aptitude or lack a culture that values education. But you are an adult and fully capable of doing reading of histories that document the contributions of nearly everybody other than white men—with an occasional exception to demonstrate that there is no bias in history.
You’re better than that, I think. Or could be if you were not so insecure that you cannot risk being proven mistaken in your very privileged view of the world and your own accomplishments.
We see eternal repetition of bad data, treating disparate outcomes as "proof" of discrimination. When something is supported by a tide of bad data it's probably not correct.
Sure, race is sometimes relevant--but it's sometimes an advantage, also. We eternally see people lumped together on skin color in trying to prove discrimination even when that means combining very unlike groups.
I'm sure you recall the "redlining" "problem" that I brought up here some years ago. Supposedly they were discriminating against black borrowers. Yet race had
zero impact on whether someone would be approved. Pretty hard to be discriminating when there's no difference. What they had found was that in certain mostly-black zip codes bankers were less likely to approve low-down mortgages. 80:20 was the same, though.
Thus we are left with explaining why they only discriminate against blacks who are after low-down mortgages in not very good parts of town. Sounds very much like p-hacking. The much simpler explanation is that bankers don't like writing low-down mortgages in areas without price appreciation. And when faced with two theories that fit take the one with the least complexity. The "evidence" consistently fails to consider if there are other reasonable explanations.