Spark In Darkness

I have recently said how vulnerable GBLT youth is. Without a strong, understanding support network, our kids grow up often very much alone and with very few connections to the GBLT community, its allies or anyone else who would support them.

Worse, they are surrounded by a world that demonises in a near constant bombardment. This is not only harmful - it’s soul destroying. Yet time and again people fight tooth and nail against even the slightest movement to try and stem to the tide, to try and save so much pain.

In Tennesee there are two bills currently being considered to ban any mention in schools of “alternate” sexualities thankfully they seem to be in for an uncertain future - but they are dangerous things. Like Section 28, these laws prevent GBLT youth seeing anything like themselves in school, prevent them seeing anything POSITIVE about people like them.


A bill was introduced in South Carolina by Rep Janet Brady to protect teens from violence on dates. It looked very sensible - and then Rep Greg Delleny decided to spill bigotry all over it and specify that it only apply to HETEROSEUXAL dates - because gods forbid they mention homosexuality in schools!

A dailykos/research 2000 poll on Republican attitudes found a staggering 73% said gay people shouldn’t be allowed to be teachers I dearly hope that statistic is wrong.

A child in Ohio was humiliated and bullied by his teachers for having long hair. So rigidly are gender roles enforced that any child steeping outside of them can face this level of harassment from their teacher!

Rep Jared Polis in the US congress has introduced The Student Non-Discrimination Act that will protect LGBT youth from discrimination in schools. It’s shocking that this doesn’t exist already and terrible that it is needed - but LGBLT youth are frequently not only the target of vicious bullying, exacerbated by the closet - but can also face homophobic and unsympathetic teachers who not only won’t protect them - but will add to the persecution.

An ex-gay group is passing out fliers in schools in DC and the teachers claim they can’t stop it. Hateful propaganda is being passed to these kids - to allow hate groups to proselytise in schools is ridiculous - to allow ignorant, disproven , damaging fools to pass out their “knowledge” in schools is antithetical to all that school stands for

A school Tulsa, Oklahoma has resisted demands that they ban a gay friendly book that contained a *gasp* same-sex couple that parents tried to have banned. Is mere depiction of our couples really that dangerous? Is it so important that children be raised in ignorance of relationships that actually exist? Why should any school support ignorance? But worse than that - actions like these work to ensure that GBLT children will never ever see people like themselves, lives they can live

Students at John Carrol university are resorting to demonstrations after GBLT anti-discrimination clauses were denied. Why? Why do we have to ask for this for our young people? Why do our youth have to fight and demand to be treated equally? Why isn’t it a given?

At another university - Notre Dame, infamous already for that awful cartoon - they decided to throw out any claims of academia and invite and ex-gay proponent as a speaker. Extra fun? She’s going to be part of a panel on what makes an “authentic man or woman”. Oh yeah - this is going to be REALLY healthy for the GBLT kids on campus, don’t you think? And, just in case it needs to be said, Notre Dame has no policy against discriminating against GBLT folks either.


We need education. We need kids to understand that we exist and we deserve to exist. We need our kids to understand that they have value - they have worth, they have a place in this world and they have every right to that place with safety, security and dignity.


One step forwards is the new DVD being produced by Stonewall to combat anti-GBLT bullying. The statistics are frightening - 41% of gay students beaten up last year. 90% of teachers hearing anti-gay taunts. 75% of young gays in faith schools have faced homophobic abuse. Teachers have little training in homophobia - but hopefully this DVD (and a new government scheme requiring bullying incidents to be recorded) may help stop turning school into a destructive torture for our youth.

One unfortunate solution in LA is to open a school/hone study programme for GBLT youth has it come to this that our children cannot even go to school because of the fear? But when the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network reports that a horrific 86% of GBLT students reported harassment and 3 fifths of GBLT students had skipped school because they felt unsafe... something has to be done.


Our kids need to learn - and society will already teach them hate. We need to counter that. For the sake of our children.

Nepal is including GBLT rights in their charter. Their constitution will expressly protect the rights of GBLT people.

I love to see something like this. Unflinching complete and utter declaration that bigotry against GBLT people is wrong in all cases without exception, without mitigation, no waffling. It’s bloody WRONG and should not happen in any instance for any reason.


And while we’re on the international subject - here is a handy dandy little map to tell us who has signed the UN declaration on LGBT rights. Who hasn’t, and who has signed the counter resolution opposing it. I use similar maps to consider which countries are safe for travel (albeit the red on my map is way way more extensive). I’m debating whether I should rethink charitable contributions on that basis as well.

I ran across, in my internet browsing, someone who was frustrated by all the self-justification from straight women writing M/M fiction (all of it? personally I’ve seen very little self-justification - and a whole lot more appropriation without a second thought. What justification there is from most seems to be more to deflect the “eeew why do you want to write about mansex, you weirdo?!” critics than the “are you treating homosexuals with respect?” concern). Normally I’d just walk on buy, but it came to a refrain that I’ve heard in many many places that made me springboard this post. I heard it during Lambda Fail. I heard it during Race Fail. I’ve heard it repeatedly whenever it comes to discussing marginalised people in fiction

It’s just fiction.

It’s made up.

So it doesn’t matter.

Dingding! Privileged check on aisle 3, privileged check on aisle 3!

“It’s just fiction” is a stance that a privileged person can take. But for the marginalised? That book with gay/lesbian/black/trans/asian/disabled etc characters is an oddity. It’s a rarity in a world where such portrayals are only remotely common within narrow genres and are nigh-non-existent in the mainstream.

To the privileged, that takes some grasping. I am currently sat surrounded by my library - hundreds of books and dvds. I can pick up any one of them and KNOW there will be a white person inside. I can pick up about 90% of them and know the main character will be white. I can pick up any of them and KNOW there will be a straight person inside - and, again, 90% of the characters within will be straight.

I would say at least half of them are lacking even a token appearance by a POC and up to 80% have no GBLT presence at all. Add in that of those token characters, I would say as many of half of them are strongly stereotypical or otherwise problematic.

It‘s only fiction. But it matters. It matters that, growing up for so long I didn’t see a single depiction of a gay man. It matters that the first depiction of a man like me I read was written by Ann “you can turn gay by being anally raped by a tent peg” McCaffrey. It matters that I STILL haven’t read a book with a gay main character that is even remotely considered mainstream. It matters because, in the world of literature, people like me hardly exist.

I repeat again that, no, I don’t think straight people should stop writing with GBLT fiction. They should write it - just as I think white people should write about POC. I will never ever say that people should only write about people like them. But there is a huge world of difference between writing the other well (or trying to) and using, appropriating and stereotyping the other.

So, yes, I like it when straight authors write their justification for why they are using gay characters. I like that they’re THINKING about how to portray their characters in a respectful, non-fetishised and non-abusive manner. And, no you can’t assume that authors are. You can’t assume that just because they want to write about gay men or black people or Native Americans that their portrayals won’t be offensive or damaging or insulting. There’s far too much out there that makes it abundantly clear that this isn’t the case. Just because they write something doesn’t mean they care about the people, doesn’t mean they are an ally, doesn’t mean they’ve worked and researched to make their work

So, yes, I like the justification musings. I like the thinking. I like that they may be thinking of the young gay kid looking for someone like them. I like that they’re recognising that portrayals can be damaging and insulting. I like that they are looking beyond their privilege and trying to respect us, rather than use us. I like that they are trying to get it right.

It may be fiction, it may be made up - but that doesn’t mean it isn’t important.

Mexico city has has just passed the marriage equality bill 39-20 which will bring their civil unions law (like most civil unions law, the previous law did not convey the full rights of marriage) to fully fledged marriage - as it should be



And this is important - as we can see that seperate always manages the first - but never manages the second.

As was found in New Jersey despite civil unions having all the rights as marriage - on paper - New Jersey couples with civil unions are treated differently from those who are married in part thanks to the continuing homophobia of the US federal government

The new healthcare bill in America seems to be setting records of wishy-washyness and half measures - and it certainly threw women under the bus with it's grossly anti-choice inserts. But it also takes a stab at gay people - preserving the 'gay tax' on health benefits'



I say it again, these legal protections for our families are important - even more important than for heterosexuals. Because your relationships will be respected ANYWAY. But people will take any excuse to see our love as lesser, as 2nd rate as beneath 'proper' heterosexual love. And is it any surprise that they do? When religions and nations across the world agree with them and support it in their dogma, their speeches and their laws

Our lvoe has value - and is as deserving of the same protections and rights as heterosexual love.

So we have

Washington DC council votes to legalise gay marriage! Woohoo victory and a step forward!

Lesbian couple in Gibraltar win appeal after they were refused a joint tenancy agreement thank gods - seriously trying to stop gay people living together?

And on the amusing side - Nevada brothels can now have male prostitutes as well! (All discrimination is bad after all). What amuses me about this is this homophobe OBJECTING (calling it a pearl harbour no less!) because it will make the industry less socially acceptable.

Oh please. Is there really a huge number of people who are pro-prostitution but anti-homosexuality? Y'know, don't answer that. It'll probably depress me


And am I the only one who thinks the brothel in question could make a lot of money advertising itself as the most immoral brotherl in Nevada?

This piece originally appeared at Womanist Musings where Renee has very generously allowed my random musings to appear on her excellent blog



Ok blink, you read it right. No go back and read it again, trust me it’s not a typo. I am a homophobe.

Not something you usually expect someone to admit to. Far less a gay man. So let me explain myself before you all wonder if Sparky has started drinking early today.

It would be probably more accurate to say I have absorbed homophobia. I, like probably 99% of everyone reading this (and I only leave that 1% because I have a powerful dislike of certainty) grew up in a homophobic, hetero-normative society. My parents, my vast extended family, the media I consumed and consume, the books I read, the schools I attended, the college and university I went to, my work colleagues and bosses - in short everything around me for my entire life is hetero-normative and on some level rejects, diminishes and others homosexuality to varying degrees.

From the invisible, to the stereotyped, to the hateful venom, to the empty pity to the endless assumption that you are/will be/should be heterosexual we live in societies that are steeped in homophobia.

And that leaves a stain.

It has stained me. Some of the stain is from being homophobia’s victim. There are places I fear to go, people I avoid. Despite being out and proud, I still fear touching or hugging Beloved in public. At times in conversation I still use careful gender-neutral speech rather than out-right saying my partner is another man. I am harshly critical and angry with homosexuals who do ridiculous things or commit heinous crimes because I know I will be judged by their actions.

But homophobia itself has also stained me, not just living in the shadow of it. I have laughed at homophobic jokes before my brain caught up and replaced mirth with rage and hurt. I have pandered to stereotypes. I have played up to them. I even spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to follow stereotypes for fear I was Doing Gay Wrong. I make assumptions about my gay friends that I would slap people for if they assumed it about me (or at least give them a stern and long winded lecture. Trust me, the slap is more humane).

And the people who spend the most time with me are the same. The people who have taken the greatest pains not to exclude me, not to hurt me and generally not whack me round the head with their straight privilege - still do so on a depressing number of occasions. Friends and certainly family (my parents alone have filled up stacks of bingo cards - and many a sleepless night of pain and sadness) have all taken their turns bludgeoning me with privilege, thoughtlessness and homophobia


My point?

After much rambling, my point is - the chances are you’re stained by homophobia too. I know the instinct is to deny that - I do the same thing. Some people complain about those sensitive gay folks (or women or black folks or any other marginalised body for that matter) who are seeing homophobia/sexism/racism/etc everywhere. They don’t realise that we see it everywhere because it IS EVERYWHERE. Even on ourselves.

Denying it won’t fix it. We all carry the stains our society leaves upon us.

Some of it is our privileges - enjoying a world that is tailored to us in so many ways we don’t even notice or realise how much things are designed for us. Or the ways it is NOT designed for those that do not share our privilege.

Some of it is normative behaviour - we assume that a certain state of being is the norm - whether it’s cisgendered or able bodied or heterosexual or the thousand other normative assumptions we make. We assume and impose a norm that excludes those that don’t fit it.

And some of it is active harm. Intentional or otherwise, it’s behaviour that hurts and devalues people. It doesn’t just cast them as other (though that is bad in itself), it casts them as LESS.


These are the stains society leaves - stains we all carry - even those that are harmed by them. It’s tempting to say “but not me.” It’s much easier to say “I’m gay! How can anything I do be homophobic?” or “I’m an ally! Of course I’m not homophobic!”. But if we look in the mirror we all know there have been times - and will be times - when our own stains are showing.

And we need to recognise that.

We need to recognise the times when we hurt people and work to change our behaviour, school our language, challenge our assumptions that are so deeply ingrained - otherwise we just add to that stain and ensure the next generation will carry its smut.

We need to recognise that we WILL show that stain from time to time - and when people correct us they’re trying to help us wash it out. That there’s no need or call for anger and defensiveness.

And we need to recognise that others will show their stain - and that doesn’t mean they’re a die-hard spreader of hatred and filth (though they may be - and if they are it‘s time to start scrubbing, because there are some vile people out there that will never come clean) but nor does it mean we can let them spread the stain of prejudice without challenging them.


In the end, my point (rather rambly and severely strained under the creaking weight of a rather rusty metaphor) is that prejudice is EVERYWHERE - and so the fight to remove it has to happen everywhere - sometimes even our own heads.

I realise some people may not be aware so to remind people - Uganda is currently passing a law that grossly oppresses homosexuality. Homosexuals will be imprisoned for long terms - or executed. Anyone speaking in favour of homosexuals or “promoting” homosexuality can be imprisoned.

The sad thing is that some people may not be aware of this. I rather suspect most people aren’t.

See, I try to stay connected. I have a 101 news feeds that spam me every day from around the world - I also have double that in blogs I follow to increase my awareness. It’s a duty of everyone to be informed, I think - there really are few excuses for ignorance in this day and age.

The gay blogs have been very good at reporting this horrendous law and responses. Or lack therof - Catholic church, English Anglican church, I’m looking at you, homophobes. You can‘t even condemn a law to slaughter us?! Tweedle Phobe and Tweedle Bigot are happy for their churches to push this law and say nothing in opposition? Then people wonder why we look at the Anglican and Catholic churches as utterly evil, bigoted organisations? Oh and Obama - WHY does the US have no stance on this bloody law? Go go fierce advocate!

The blogs also cover the history behind it, including the many WESTERN churches, religious figures and pro-hate activists that have been involved (Rick Warren, that would be you, bastard). Box Turtle Bulletin in particular has done an amazing job of documenting this and keeping us updated - follow the dated links at the bottom of the page

The news feeds? *crickets* Maybe the odd throw-away line. One short article of one MPs PROPOSAL (never mind the actual law and progress) thank you BBC. Or a couple of nods (Guardian, Independent). The Daily Mail & Telegraph mention it in passing - but as how it makes things awkward for Brown (somehow).

I actually had to look for even these snippets - because they weren’t high on the feeds or in the papers. Watching the news on TV or Teletext will convince you it’s not even happening. The more I read my news feeds, the more I see it mentioned vaguely in passing - if at all. Frankly, I’ve seen better cover from American news sources - and precious little from most of them ( a nod to Rachel Maddow).

Compare that to the Swiss Minaret ban - a deeply disgusting and bigoted law, to be sure - and you have not just column inches - but column acres being written to condemn this bigotry. And rightly so - the Swiss minaret ban is nothing short of blatant religious bigotry. The fact that there isn’t even a great demand in Switzerland for new minarets shows this law for what it is - a message bigotry from the people of Switzerland against a marginalised body. it’s a symbolic gesture of hatred.

It is disgusting and worth every column inch and every expression of outrage - in fact, it could have done with a damn site more attention (though it is still in the news feeds now).

But surely a bill to IMPRISON and EXECUTE a marginalised group and anyone who speaks for them is worth as much attention? Having gay sex carries a LIFE IMPRISONMENT. Having gay sex multiple times is enough to be executed under this bill. And anyone who defends us, supports us OR DOESN’T REPORT US, can go to prison for up to 3 years. Someone from Uganda who leaves the country and has gay sex ELSEWHERE, will be sought for extradition.

Is it because it’s Africa? And Africa generally does receive previous little media attention. Is it because its homosexuals? After all there are already countries that kill us and torture us, what’s one more right?

This is a proposed genocide against homosexuals. Where’s the outrage? Where’s the fury? How can ANYONE be neutral on this? How can they have no position on this? Why isn’t the press screaming blue murder? Why aren’t more nations following in Sweden’s footsteps and cutting aid - hells, cutting ties and condemning them in no uncertain terms?

The silence is telling

Argentinian gay marriage overturned. Couple back in limbo - if their marriage will ever happen. How very depressing - and heart breaking for the poor couple involved


gay couple barred from Top Gear audience. Because it needs an equal number of men and women? Well THAT'S a new excuse. I have to give them points for originality


And the forwards:
Anti-gay Christian counsellor loses appeal over gay couples Look, haven't we covered this? If you are employed to provide government services you CANNOT pick and choose who you provide those services to - who the hell do you think you are?

Thankfully they lost the appeal. As I said back with Lilian Ladele if they had won this case the precedent would have been ridiculous. Can you imagine counsellor picking and choosing who he provided government services too based on his personal religious beliefs? Would he refuse those not married in a church? Those of different faiths? What about a couple where the wife isn't "submissive" enough? Not taking the obey seriously? Well you government backed marriage counsellor has decided his religious beliefs need to be imposed on his job!

Really, common sense should tell you how ridiculous it is

except to say that it badly damaged a good night and made me feel damned uncomfortable and irritated.


In my hibernatey state, Beloved and I decided to dredge through our skyplus and watch television. This is pretty unique for us, since neither of us particularly like tv - oh we set Sky Plus to record lots - and then never ever watch it. But tonight I needed to relax with some brain fluff (and Beloved refused to endure my DVD collection) so TV it was.

Among other things, we watched Top Gear. We don’t particularly care about cars - but it tends to be funny and Richard Hammond is very nice eye candy. Yes, yes he is.

And in this episode there was a road trip in America, one of their notorious challenges which are normally great fun. This, however, did contain a lot of rather unpleasant southern state stereotypes that were problematic and not ideal for fluff watching and made me cringe too much to laugh.

And then they got to Alabama. The challenge was to cross the state without being shot or arrested - while trying to get your fellows in trouble by decorating their car in an inflammatory manner.

Jeremy Clarkson ended up with “Country & Western is rubbish” daubed on the side of his car
James May ended up with “Hillary for President” written on his car.
Richard Hammond had “Manlove Rules OK” painted in pink on his car. The headlights were also painted pink.

We watched for 2 seconds before changing the programme.

(I did find the clip on You Tube here because I’m told there was better segments and something poignant about Katrina after they finished in Alabama).

I know it’s supposed to be humour. And yes, exposing ignorant homophobes is a useful and powerful tool.

But giving the impression you’re gay to provoke a homophobic attack for laughs and amusement? Chuckling away that being seen as gay may get you shot?

Sorry, I’m not laughing. I know it’s supposed to be a laugh, I know it makes a comment about homophobia and I know that Top Gear and the personalities on it have a reputation for rather rough and ready humour.

But, even with the clip, I haven’t watched that segment - I really don’t want to see that. I don’t need to see it. I don’t want to see the straight guys maybe get a taste of homophobia or homophobic violence and go back to their nice safe straightness for the next stage of the challenge.

Typical, I can’t even hibernate without getting something to rant about.

A friend of mine recently asked my opinion of m/m fiction in general. I tried to answer then and there but found myself rambling around because it is complicated muchly - and within it are many ifs maybes and buts. So, time to make an LJ post to see if I can sort out my own thoughts and see if the wonderful people who read this can help find order in the ramble.

First of all - the definition. M/m fiction as I see it, is literature centring around a male/male relationship. It is also primarily written by straight women.

And I know some gay men loathe it with a fiery passion. And I don’t blame them - because most of it is bloody awful.

No, really. It’s full of gross (and often insulting) stereotypes, focused entirely on the sexing, full of tired and unrealistic tropes.

Now the reason I haven’t had the same averse reaction to the genre is the FIRST m/m I read was actually very good. I have read good m/m fiction since then - but the very first m/m fiction I came across in the net was written by 2 women whose stories I still follow and enjoy immensely (I had thought to name them here but have decided against doing so. If I invite controversy with my musings I‘d rather not spill it into their spaces). These were good stories with actual developed characters, great plot lines and in general were good reads.

Since then I have read good m/m. But the majority I’ve read doesn’t come close - in fact it goes a long damn way from coming close. In fact, let’s be frank, most of it is porn. The m/m characters have as much relation with actual gay men as the nigh obligatory “lesbian” sex scene in porn aimed at heterosexual men. And, naturally, that has strong implications of appropriation, exploitation and voyeurism to say the least and potential consequences for young gays looking for something about them come across a stereotypical, angst filled, sex obsessed one-hand-reading piece of m/m fiction.

In short, I do not like the majority of m/m fiction because it doesn’t have gay men in it - it has blow up dolls painted with rainbows.

This is further exacerbated by what I’ve seen of the m/m community - though I admit my perceptions are heavily coloured from the Lambda fail (Details: here, here, here, here and here.) I have found it to be extremely straight-centric, straight privileged, very cavalier with gay people, characters and issues and with a very strong sense of entitlement (displayed grossly by the Lambda award brouhaha). We have some straight authors pretending to be gay to sell books - and arguing that that is ok and even straight authors assuming they are allied to (you don’t get to claim ally status) LGBT people just because they write about gay sex. I have seen them show up in gay spaces, gay forums, pride parades, gay events and actually acting like authorities or members because of what they write.

In short, I have been neither impressed nor amused. In fact, I don’t consider the m/m genre to be a safe space for gay men.

BUT, I am unwilling to throw away the whole category of m/m altogether. I as I said some authors of m/m write extremely good stories with gay characters. Some of them read this journal and they know they’re good (or should do :P). I also do not buy into the idea that straight writers can’t write gay characters. I think it takes time and effort and research to write gay characters in a sympathetic, realistic, non-stereotypical and non-offensive way - but I have no problem with straight people writing gay characters. I think the idea that they shouldn’t is both silly and self-defeating.

So what, I ask myself, to do? What is the way out here?

IDEALLY I would like to see a split of genres. With m/m fiction being classed as primarily books aimed at straight women that largely orientate around the *ahem* “relationship” (term used loosely). With another coined genre based on gay characters in a more full, less fetishised/voyeuristic fashion. In truth I think the latter would often fit nicely into CURRENT genres. Is there a reason why a quality Sci-Fi, Fantasy or Romance novel is suddenly labelled m/m just because it has gay characters in centre stage? Why does the fact the main characters are gay utterly change the genre? Are gay characters unfit or unqualified, somehow?

(I have to say at this point that I wouldn’t support the idea of straight authors writing books that were labelled as ‘gay fiction’. For obvious reasons).


Of course, the ‘ideal’ doesn’t happen. Mainstream publishers are not exactly falling over themselves for books with gay main characters. And publishers that do publish m/m primarily are very much a part of the genre and I doubt very much will draw any distinction at all between a book written with realistic, fully fleshed out, non-stereotypical gay characters in an absorbing and detailed plotline who do more than hump and angst and books which are intended to read one handed, written by Julian McHomo (honest), have more words spent describing the throbbing of penis than actual plot and have characters that make yaoi ‘uke’ and ‘seme’ characterisations seem a positively glowing example of homosexual relationships.


Despite the ideal being likely unattainable, I have to say I am unequivocally against the good authors who are as not impressed as I am from just putting down their pens and packing up their keyboards. And, sadly, I have seen 2 authors consider doing just that. Removing the well characterised plots from the voyeuristic, appropriation almost-porn will not make the headache-inducing stories less common, less prevalent or slow down its production nor will it balance the genre or the community. While I can understand an element of not wanting to be part of or being seen to be supporting a community whose practices you find objectionable, there also has to be a measure of practicality.


So I would say that, even if you don’t like all that happens in the genre, write. Promote where you can in the community - preferably choosing the least objectionable spaces (and they most certainly exist) - but don’t be afraid to hold your nose now and then. Choose the publisher most sensitive to your concerns - but in the end, any port in a storm. Don’t think that being a part of the genre means you can’t criticise it.

Mercenary? Maybe. But I’d rather see more good stories with gay characters out there, than the authors deciding they don’t want any part of the various problematic issues in the genre. I don’t think either their disapproving stance is damage nor the genre’s negative elements encouraged by their participation. And if they were, I think these concerns are outweighed by the benefit of having allies increasing the amount of realistic portrayals of gay men in literature.


So... I’ve rambled a whole hell of a lot here and not said an awful lot, largely because of my own ambivalence. I have to say again that I don’t think in any way that my characterisation of the m/m genre to all m/m authors. It may not even apply to most (but, if it doesn’t, then ‘most’ are very very quiet). And, again, I say that my perceptions have been coloured by the Lambda debate and similar which did not show the genre in the best possible light. I do feel though. there’s more than a little... unpleasantness there and some very strong problematic elements. I don’t know exactly where to go here (or how to end this piece) but it’s probably something I’m going to be musing about for a while.