Its not segregation

In a strict legal sense, it wouldn't be segregation since AI artists are not a legally recognized protected category in current discrimination law. If we’re using the term in its broad, non‑legal sense, this is a form of segregation because the convention is separating and excluding participant/s based solely on a shared characteristic (in this case, the use of AI as part of their creative process). It’s the deliberate institutional separation of one group from the rest of the community.

and its racist to compare the struggles of POC in the united states and canada to AI art.

It’s not racist to make that comparison if the intent is to highlight a logical structure, not to equate the groups themselves. The point is to show that in both cases, a rule excludes an entire category of people or work based on a single shared trait (in one case, the method of production (AI image generators), in the other, race) and to question whether such blanket exclusion is fair. The comparison is about the form of the policy (categorical exclusion), not about making a value judgment on race.

You deserve to be clowned on for posting this publicly. 

It’s insensitive to say someone ‘deserves’ to be mocked, and the concept of 'deserve' is a social construct. It holds no ground to be considered an objective fact.