>I figured if you can understand that "alms for the poor" isn't an example of "reverse discrimination"

This is comparing apples to oranges. Alms for the poor is a personal choice: I decide to give some of my own money to someone who I think needs it more than I do.

"Reverse discrimination" in the sense you're using it refers (within this analogy) to somebody else taking your money away from you, because they believe that somebody needs it more than you do. I could write a book (others already have) about how many things can and always do go wrong with this approach.