Positionality statements, which aim to reveal unequal power dynamics in knowledge production, have become a widely encouraged reflexive practice in international relations and other disciplines. However, this article critically examines the potential negative implications of this methodology, particularly how it reifies material, assumed, and imagined hierarchies between people, which are then advertised and reproduced through its utterance. The article argues that the modernist origins of reflexive methodology, which have inspired the practice of declaring positionality, are rooted in coloniality, which has implications for its use today. The coloniality of reflexivity is explored through three key functions: first, the paradox of publicly acknowledging privilege as a means of centering whiteness through the narcissistic gaze and assertion of legitimacy; second, the redemption of guilt for the hegemonic researcher; and third, the potential for positionality statements to constitute hidden power moves that signal and reinstate one's authority over people, especially women of color. The article calls for a reparative scholarship that acknowledges these limitations in positionality statements. It argues that positionality statements, while intended to promote reflexivity and equality, may instead reinforce hierarchical power dynamics and colonial legacies. The article highlights the need for a more critical and inclusive approach to knowledge production that challenges the dominant, often white, epistemic frameworks. It also emphasizes the importance of recognizing the racial and colonial implications of reflexivity and the need for a more equitable and just scholarly practice. The article concludes by advocating for a scholarship that is not only reflexive but also reparative, acknowledging the historical and ongoing impacts of colonialism on knowledge production and the need for a more inclusive and equitable academic environment.Positionality statements, which aim to reveal unequal power dynamics in knowledge production, have become a widely encouraged reflexive practice in international relations and other disciplines. However, this article critically examines the potential negative implications of this methodology, particularly how it reifies material, assumed, and imagined hierarchies between people, which are then advertised and reproduced through its utterance. The article argues that the modernist origins of reflexive methodology, which have inspired the practice of declaring positionality, are rooted in coloniality, which has implications for its use today. The coloniality of reflexivity is explored through three key functions: first, the paradox of publicly acknowledging privilege as a means of centering whiteness through the narcissistic gaze and assertion of legitimacy; second, the redemption of guilt for the hegemonic researcher; and third, the potential for positionality statements to constitute hidden power moves that signal and reinstate one's authority over people, especially women of color. The article calls for a reparative scholarship that acknowledges these limitations in positionality statements. It argues that positionality statements, while intended to promote reflexivity and equality, may instead reinforce hierarchical power dynamics and colonial legacies. The article highlights the need for a more critical and inclusive approach to knowledge production that challenges the dominant, often white, epistemic frameworks. It also emphasizes the importance of recognizing the racial and colonial implications of reflexivity and the need for a more equitable and just scholarly practice. The article concludes by advocating for a scholarship that is not only reflexive but also reparative, acknowledging the historical and ongoing impacts of colonialism on knowledge production and the need for a more inclusive and equitable academic environment.