I am worried that when non-marginalized groups are harassed, the punishment won't be as severe as harassing someone who is from a marginalized group. I'm not t

I am worried that when non-marginalized groups are harassed, the punishment won't be as severe as harassing someone who is from a marginalized group. I'm not the one who needs to give examples. They stated that they particularly "don't tolerate excluding people in socially marginalized groups". So, I imply that they are going to be more strict against this behavior in that specific case, otherwise there would be no use in making that point. For example: "We will exclude you from interaction if you insult, demean or harass anyone." Is a perfectly understandable clause, and no further information would be needed in case they were not planning on discriminating based on the "group" that people belong to. It's analogous to saying: "Killing is bad, it's particularly bad if the person you kill is a politician." It implies that killing a politician is morally worse than killing someone else. If you didn't want to imply that, you would simply say "Killing is bad", which everyone can understand.