The same goes for other minorities who are treated like lesser people who need handouts.
This is the softest of sciences, minimally quantitative, non-experimentally verifiable and therefore subject to massive institutional bias - the same way that proponents of forced equity believe that the institutions they are fighting with have developed their own biases.
Equality of opportunity does not imply equality of outcome. But it doesn't matter - this post will likely be flagged because our own institution is increasingly biased toward certain unacceptable viewpoints - to the degree that we forbid discussion on nearly every popular forum. But you're only emboldening and recruiting extremists when you silence an entire alternative point of view.
Edit: Let me explain further, and justify my use of the word "dangerous." Let's forget for a moment the specific topic at hand. Imagine a field of study which is strongly influencing corporate and, local, state, and federal policy, which is simultaneously immune from criticism because of cultural norms.
That is where all of these pro-diversity and pro-inclusion studies are coming from. I'm not necessarily suggesting that they're wrong - only that systematically, institutionally, this is poor science and possibly leading society down a suboptimal path.
One side of the diversity and inclusion discussion is forbidden. We are forced, top down, to take it as a given that this is how things should be done. I cannot support alternative viewpoints with sources because researchers who would publish anything against the grain would be, in modern parlance, cancelled.