[asciicircum]

> in all cases, the party that gets rejected due to these policies is explicitly the party that statistically has the most opportunity in the ecosystem at large.

You are possibly discriminating people unfairly. The evidence on causes of the representation gap is not conclusive - i.e. we don't know beyond reasonable doubt it's nothing but white male privilege. Difference in interests - be it due to nature or nurture - seem to exist and could at least partially explain the gap.

I'm opposed to all discrimination - and as long as you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that the enacted discrimination only counters privilege and nothing more you don't have a leg to stand on if your overall position is equality.

> But I'm not going to join anyone's pity party over it either

You dismiss a group speaking up against discrimination as whiners even though the evidence that would allow you to do so is inconclusive. This seems like an unreasonable position to take.