Do not pick one word out of context, especially when the (obtuse and academic) definition of that word is important for the understanding of the text (as explai

Do not pick one word out of context, especially when the (obtuse and academic) definition of that word is important for the understanding of the text (as explained by the sibling comment). Again, this document does not at any place say anything that can reasonably be interpreted as "objectivity in math is white supremacy". Here is an example of what this document is talking about (in unnecessarily obtuse language, but the authors probably did not expect readers primed to read it with a negative interpretation): A *very* common wasted opportunity is the following. A student is given a problem to solve. They solve it by method A. The teacher wanted method B and grades the student poorly because method A is objectively different from method B. An opportunity to learn was wasted because the teacher used something they would consider "objective" or call "expecting perfectionism". "Objective" is a weasel word in this context that just absolves the instructor from considering the particular situation of the student and teaching to them. It seems you would be incredulous that this is my reading of the document. On the other hand, until six months ago, I was absolutely incredulous that anyone would read anything different in this document. It sounded crazy to me that people would read it the way you do. But I guess I have to concede that the document was written poorly and it triggers a lot of people. For context, if you care, to me the reading I presented seems obvious because I have read other pedagogical research literature that gives the same advice without discussing race. So the (tangential) mention along the lines of "ideologies of supremacy use the same language as inflexible teachers incapable of adjusting to the needs of their students" seemed like a curiosity, not like something over which to grab pitchforks.