It was presumptuous of you to say that the winners were chosen to highlight diversity, because of some American agenda, and to bring new writers to Medium. Saying that they were chosen because they came from "under-represented" groups, not because of their skill or talent, is undermining them and saying they didn't deserve to win. You also said you anxiously waited for the results, so it sounds to me like you wanted to win, and are upset because you feel like you never stood a chance for various perceived reasons. To make such loaded statements, reeking with condescension and self-importance, you would want to, at least, write as well as the winners. I feel confident saying you don't, objectively, because at least I have the judges on my side. Just because you attribute bias or an agenda to their judging process, doesn't make you right. I believe the first 40% of your piece could have been deleted. It would have made your essay more cohesive and easier to read. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, but it's interesting that you didn't find what you said to be inflammatory. I mean you claim Ernest Hemingway wouldn't have won because of his race, gender, etc. You don't write like him, nor did any of the entrants, I feel safe in presuming.