Maybe it's the equivocation of "dominance" and "whiteness" in assertions like this: "Classrooms are often microcosms of the world around us and reinforce domin

Maybe it's the equivocation of "dominance" and "whiteness" in assertions like this: "Classrooms are often microcosms of the world around us and reinforce dominant (or white) ways of being." > It seems like a toolkit for identifying how seemingly innocuous ideas could support existing power structures in our society. Why should that be shunned? It lacks intellectual rigor and is unfalsifiable, yet the burden of proof rests on the accused. Perhaps the tools we use to teach math are suboptimal, but to assert that they are "racist" or "white" (in a harmful sense) is an extraordinary claim that needs extraordinary evidence. It should be possible to experimentally demonstrate that certain teaching methods improve the outcomes towards racial equity, then give recommendations based on those results. If this isn't possible, how could we achieve racial equity by making all these assertions, then requiring teachers to reflect upon them? Clearly, if the teachers are biased by white supremacy, all of their conclusions must be biased as well.