The form of your argument seems to be that if a policy has a race&#x2F;sex disparity in impact then it&#x27;s inherently racist&#x2F;sexist.<p>Let&#x27;s go for the reductio ad absurdum.<p>We have a choice between two policies. The first says if you&#x27;re accused of being a child&#x27;s parent and you can prove with a genetic test that you aren&#x27;t then you don&#x27;t have to pay child support. The second says if you&#x27;re accused of being a child&#x27;s parent then you have to pay child support even if you can prove you&#x27;re not.<p>Suppose we know that there is a sex disparity in impact for this policy. The people falsely accused of being a child&#x27;s parent are disproportionately men and single parents with custody are disproportionately women. If we let the accused parent prove the facts then it will benefit men to the detriment of women.<p>Therefore, by your logic, it is a sexist policy to not force people who can prove they aren&#x27;t a child&#x27;s parent to pay child support anyway. Which is absurd.