he stories reflect a broader trend flowing directly from intentional discrimination. See Wessmann v. Gittens, 160 F.3d 790, 805-06 (1st Cir. 1998); Coral Constr. Co. v. King Cnty., 941 F.2d 910, 919 (9th Cir. 1991). Anecdotes are also more susceptible to mistaken perception, leading to erroneous conclusions