I hear what you are saying, and it is a common reaction. I am still unable to see it as something other than a really complicated way to make sure one is free to acknowledge it w/o ever having to be confronted by it.

NO FACTS

BP: "I struggled in school b/c there was a lot of racism."

WP: "Wait, what do you mean? There was racism b/c something happened or is that just your opinion."

SOME FACTS

The example you commented on

HEAVY FACTS:

BP: "I struggled in school b/c there was a lot of racism. X happened and I was right there then Y happened. Then the same thing happened three more times, every time the teacher X. It happened to no one else."

WP": Well, I can think of a lot of things that explain that."

Feels like this particular challenge is a way to say "I believe it in general, but if you want to discuss it, I need proof." Most people don't live as human recorders. And, often the data is out of the target's reach.

EXAMPLE: Black guy and white guy commit same crime - exactly - have same background - exactly - get vastly different sentences.

Hard to collect trends. End result: none. The world stays just like it is when this is the thought hurdle. What am I missing?