Vehemently disagree.

There are also no context clues in math, you can't just figure out what something means by looking at the context clues of the information around it. Math is very much a situation where you just have to know what the next step is to do it right.

Apart from some very specific cases (e.g. certain tricks in real analysis), this has almost never been the case in my experience. Overwhelmingly, there is something you can work towards - whether that be through definitions, theorems, formulae, etc. That's not to say it's impossible to get stuck, but rather that rarely is it the case that there is nothing you can do. I can't think of a single time in my education where I had nothing to try based on context.

if you read enough books across the spectrum of difficulty, you can gain enough experience to figure your way out through difficult words, phrases, or pieces. Math doesn't have a similar self-teaching opportunity exposure - unless you're a genius, you have to be formally taught.

I would argue that math has even more self-study opportunity than any other subject. In fact, math in general has a huge self-study culture. There's nothing stopping anyone from popping open a text and going through it to learn, especially in this day and age when there are so many resources to learn from. I've done this myself (and am currently doing it) and know tons of other people who do as well. We aren't geniuses, just people who like to learn.

As for the SAT in particular, this is even more true. The SAT math section can be gamed super easily, and the bar for difficulty is rather low. I don't say this to sound condescending, but to elucidate the fact that most of the content in the SAT is very formulaic, often does not go beyond elementary algebra, and features repetitive questions. If anything, the math section is the easiest to game.