"You create your reality"

[anagogy]

Ra says if we see a hungry entity we feed it. If we acknowledge the hunger in an entity, are we focusing on separation?

I don't think anyone was suggesting to not acknowledge the suffering, just to not "wallow in it". In the context of your example, it would be akin to pointing out the entity is hungry, and spending your time finding someone to blame for it, and listing all the causes of it, and quoting statistics about how everyone you know is hungry, and that hunger is such a huge problem, rather than just getting on with feeding the person (which is focusing on the solution rather than the problem).

We are all going to experience catalyst that exists in negative contrast to what we desire to experience. That is nature of this world. The question is: are you using it as a place to pivot and focus on a better and more unified experience, or are you going to keep focusing on the negative contrast that was point of inspiration for it? One is oriented towards evolution, the other is oriented towards stagnation.

For example: focusing on 'how can we make this better'? <<<HELPFUL AND UNIFYING

As opposed to: 'these people with these physical characteristics are causing all the worlds problems, and have a privileged unfair advantage.'  <<<NOT HELPFUL AND DIVISIVE

When someone who is white, straight, male, etc, tells people who aren't that they shouldn't talk about their mistreatment under this social regime, what happens is repression, and a feeling of not being understood.

Why do you have to qualify it with "white, straight, male"? (and why even go to the lengths to make those assumptions about people? Do you think everybody on an anonymous internet forum shares every little detail about themselves?) Shouldn't it bother you if anyone were to do that, regardless of their physical characteristics? Do you see how its not your focus on the repression that is the actual main "problem"? You are attacking a perceived repression with yet more repression (of the people you think are responsible), and are further singling people out based on racial/gender characteristics. That is the divisive aspect of all of this (and a prime example of why these SJW groups are ultimately self defeating).

This quote literally said that these things don't exist and talking about them reinforces separation.

Is that what it said though? That these things don't exist? Or is that something being erroneously added?