is Chess just extremely unfair?


...no u don't.
I looked at your stats, your win rate overall is even for blitz, a bit under 50% for bullet and a bit over 50% for rapid, so nothing particularly unusual there.
Your stats breakdown is:
Rapid (all time)
White- 56% won, 40% lost
Black- 42% won, 53% lost
Blitz (all time)
White- 53% won, 44% lost
Black- 43% won, 54% lost
Bullet (all time)
White- 38% won, 62% lost (16 games)
Black- 50% won, 36% lost (14 games)
So idk where you're getting your figures from. Yes in the two time controls you actually actively play (rapid and blitz), you're worse with the black pieces than the white pieces, around a 12% difference, which is within the range of normality, maybe a little bit severe. Mine is a 3% difference in rapid and 5% in blitz, for context.
On average, your win rate with white is 54.5% and with black it's 42.5%.
It might be worth paying particular attention to your openings with black, maybe checking out middle game ideas for them to try to secure a better winrate, or seeing if you can figure out which white openings you play particularly badly against.
You shouldn't play much attention to the winrates in bullet, as the sample size is extremely small (literally 30 games).

I just realised you were looking at your statistics for the last 30 days, in rapid, specifically. My dude, that's only 50 games. That's a miniscule sample size. It's not that chess is somehow unfair, and you need to play hundreds more games to see if it evens out before you can draw conclusions about whether you're currently doing something right/wrong.

Just become better. There is no such thing like that white wins more than black. Yes, white has an advantage of getting the first move. Most people say that this is racist but if the rules changed and now black got the first move. Won't it still be racist according to some people? Chess is good just like how it is right now. So, Chess is not unfair.