Yeah, I mean, so a part of it is remembering that philanthropy is grounded in white supremacy. First and foremost. No matter, You know, yes, I'm working adjacent to the sector. But at the end of the day, I am fully aware that philanthropy is rooted because of capitalism and everything else, white supremacy. So oftentimes, what ends up happening, and I'll say, for organizations that are considered to be feminist issues, that hold feminist work, there's code switching. I think about the black maternal health crisis and how many doula collectives, lactation groups are having to apply under, you know, maternal health, reproductive health, whatever, and they're like, but what we're doing is birth justice. But if they said birth justice, that word right now in this moment, also, in the history of forever, is looked at as radical as something that funders, program officers feel like it's going to, you know, make their job harder. All of these things, it's code switching. Essentially, a lot of times with grant applications, code switching is helpful to get funding. And it's, it's ironic, because like I said, in maybe one or two grant cycles, you saw white women led organizations, rebrand and become Reproductive Justice, and then all of a sudden it was oh, okay, now now we can be RJ or now we can talk about RJ now we can do this. But in that moment, when Sister Song was piloted, you know, these, there wasn't this shift that we see right now in the movement. You know, I'm on calls with black folks leading organizations a good majority of my day. One because that's why I'm in community led. But two because that seems in leadership now. And I was a child, so I do not know personally, but I'm certain when Sister Song was piloted, the movement did not look this way. And, you know, folks talk about code switching in person and public and job interviews, whatever as like an act of survival. This was an act of funding and sustainability, of like, hey, like in order for us to be funded in order for us to do this work and pay our bills, and be able to show up in our communities. We got to use their language. And that's what grant applications are. That's why in the research, you read through the website, what language do they use to describe this, who's you know, who's working here what language is in their bio, like, let me make sure that my application is something that they read when I apply for this grant. And they say, You know what, because oftentimes, and philanthropy doesn't like to acknowledge this, but folks want to see themselves in their work, especially around feminist issues. When you're applying to something and, you know, some white woman as a Program Officer back then was reading it, if she couldn't see herself, or her sister or her daughter, in your work, you weren't going to be prioritized because she didn't feel prioritized. So to say something like Reproductive Justice, white women didn't see themselves in that. So that where they gotta move money to it? Likely not. Versus now where RJ is this, you know, folks have have now framed it, as, you know, created by black women, but for everyone, and it's like, ah, we gon' talk about that, but and a part of that is that rebranding, it's the rebranding that philanthropy funded. Had they not done that, I think that we'd still be in a position where like, we wouldn't be saying Reproductive Justice amongst one another, but rights in meetings. I do. And that's that power dynamics. That's what comes with that capitalism with that capital that philanthropy has, you can, and that's why, you know, constantly at NCRP, you know, you know, other folks were having that conversation that philanthropy doesn't realize how much it controls the narrative and the stigma in these movements. And that's because you, you pay for say. You, you pay for what people can and can't say. You police people with the money that you have. And that's that's just the reality.