I appreciate that, and commend your optimism. I guess I'm just being cynical from seeing how these discussions always unfolded in the past. It really does seem futile, which makes me question the point of having them. If others are getting value out of it, then of course they're more than welcome to participate.
The recurring pattern I see is precisely this:
Any objection to these policies is met with objections about the perceived race, gender, economic status, etc. of the commenters' avatar. Such objections are almost ubiquitously met with despicable comments like "Because of people like you ...", "you wouldn't understand", "you're just ignorant to the plight of ...", etc.
Things are further "locked down" by heart-felt, sincere stories of peoples' struggles in these domains. While these stories can be true, powerful and important, in this context they make any opposition look as if it's trying to be intentionally disrespectful, invalidating, etc., which is sometimes the case, but not always.
These factors make this an unwelcoming environment.
P.S. It's a little strange to think about how people are probably looking at my avatar, trying to size up whether I look gay or not, to try to determine my "allegiance" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean). Of course, that's a private matter, but it's strange to be in a forum where that's routinely happening. It shouldn't be relevant.
P.P.S. I'm leaving out the details of how there are always people who object who want to exercise (what I think is) too much control over how people choose to self-assemble in a public space. I'm sure some of it comes from a bad place, too. That also happens, but it's not the focus of my concern here.