Friday, March 12, 2010
Allies Speak Out - Community Forum to Discuss Sacred Heart
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Update on Sacred Heart Preschool Situation
1318 Mapleton Ave
Boulder, CO 80304
(303) 443-0684 bartschm@shjboulder.org
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Smile (awkwardly) for the Camera.
![]() |
| Cathy Busha and Aicila Lewis |
So I am a new age woman, full of my power and strength, and I still struggle with all the crazy female body images that seem to come with identifying as female in America. It manifests most often when people want to snap my photo. (Second most when going pants shopping.) I have learned, through the years, to tolerate the pictures. Partially to try and set an example for my kids; partially because resisting makes it worse. But I really do hate it and I usually get away with avoiding it by being the person holding the camera. (Not a very original tactic, but extremely effective.)
![]() |
| Tiph- BP intern |
So at the Red Party, Peggy Dyer brought her 1 million faces set up and took photos all evening. At the beginning of the evening, I dragged our new Program Director (Cathy Busha) up to get a Boulder Pride staff photo. My reasoning was, eat your vegetables fast. I know how these things work and I will be asked if I've done it and why not, so if I do it early and fast, I have an answer :)
And then I watched through the evening as people stepped into her mini-studio and transformed themselves by having fun. She really brought out the personality and beauty inside every person who stood in front of her. It was delightful to watch and it made me want to be part of the fun. So towards the end of the evening, I voluntarily stepped into the mat, for the sole purpose of enjoying the experience.
Check out her facebook page to see what she's up to, especially if you hate being photographed. She will trick you into liking it :) It was an honor to be part of her project.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Why Are You LGBTQ?

This week I read a guest opinion piece in the LA Times called "Genetics and Proposition 8 - Human sexual orientation has deep biological roots."
The op ed explores the 'nature or nurture' question about sexual orientation. Authors Hamer and Rosbash ask, "Are some people born gay?" By citing scientific data they conclude, "Yes, some people are simply born gay." Because sexual orientation is immutable - not our choice - the authors also conclude that 'homosexuality' should be a legally protected class.
Hamer and Rosbash write:
"Recent studies in college classrooms show that exposure of students to information on the causes of homosexuality has a direct influence on opinions about gay rights. This fits with polling data showing that people who believe that gays are "born that way" are generally supportive of full equality, whereas those who believe it is "a choice" are opposed."
Who am I to argue with science?
Yet, I worry about building the LGBTQ liberation movement on the paradigm of, "It's not our fault." Often this framework leads LGBTQ people to say things like, "It's not my fault I'm gay. Who would choose to be discriminated against?"
As a strength-based social worker, I would prefer to hear LGBTQ people proudly proclaim, "I love being LGBTQ! Despite social stigma, threats of violence and legal discrimination, I have chosen to come out. How incredibly amazing am I and every other LGBTQ person who comes out? I love being a part of the LGBTQ community. Now I am actively working to end discrimination, violence and harassment - all of which are choices that some people and institutions make."
To offer another perspective, religion is fully a choice *and* is a protected class in the United States. What if we thought about LGBTQ rights in a similar way?
For example, a recent Pew study called "Religion Among the Millennials" found:
"By some key measures, Americans ages 18 to 29 are considerably less religious than older Americans. Fewer young adults belong to any particular faith than older people do today. They also are less likely to be affiliated than their parents' and grandparents' generations were when they were young. Fully one-in-four members of the Millennial generation - so called because they were born after 1980 and began to come of age around the year 2000 - are unaffiliated with any particular faith."
Are the reasons the Millennials are turning away from organized religion based in nature or nurture? Should we attack the Millennials for not choosing organized religion? Should they be legally discriminated against? Harassed? Kicked out of their families? Have to justify their choices? Most (reasonable) people would say, "Of course not."
In the end, what 'causes' sexual orientation is the wrong question. It shouldn't matter whether sexual orientation is nature or nurture. Heterosexuals are never asked to explain the causes of why they are straight (except for the fabulous "Heterosexual Questionnaire").
When we debate the question of why we are LGBTQ, we fall into a trap by accepting the framework of those who seek to actively harm us. We waste a whole lot of time, energy, resources and emotions trying to convince others (and sometimes ourselves) that 'it's not our fault.'
Instead, let's offer a new paradigm and a new question we ask of others - "I choose honesty. I choose love. I choose authenticity. What do you choose?"
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
“Cathy is usually a girl’s name…”
.jpg)
Last week, a 4-year-old looked at me earnestly, paused, then said, “Cathy is usually a girl’s name.”
Though she didn’t seem convinced, she moved on to more important topics (the deliciousness of putting potato chips in a sandwich).
When I was seven years old, I ran down two flights of school stairs and burst out the front doors for recess. Once outside, I yelled and spit. Mrs. Walls captured me. “What do you think you’re doing, young lady?” I shrugged my shoulders as the boys ran on in front of me, yelling and spitting. “Young ladies don’t run down stairs, and young ladies certainly don’t yell or spit. Back upstairs. No recess for you today.”
When I was nine years old, my Brownie troop took a field trip to Burger King. We toured the grill, walk-in freezer, and fry station – it was magical. When we were done with our tour, we each received a burger, fries, and Coke. “Small bites, young lady. Ladies take small bites.” “I’m hungry,” I mumbled, mouth full. “Well, too bad. You need to learn to eat like a lady,” as she picked at a salad and drank a Diet Coke.
When I was twelve years old, I was the only girl on after-school flag football team. “Lezzie. She even throws like a boy.”
Truth is, I threw better than the boys :)
When I was twenty-two years old (and 23 to 38 and counting). “Sir. You’re in the wrong bathroom.” I now send my partner ahead on bathroom reconnaissance to scope it out and let me know if it is single stall with a door that locks, and what my chances are to sneak in undetected.
When I was thirty-three years old... “What’ll you have, sir?” “A vagina,” I silently answered. “A Revolution,” my noiseless monologue continued. “Tecate with a lime, please,” I responded out loud.
“Oh my gosh i Am so sorry…”
“Why? Are you out of limes?”
As a working-class daughter of a cab driver, my dad loved and celebrated my tomboy buoyancy. As the only girl of her four children, my mother cursed my skateboard and pleaded with me to trade it in for floral print blouses and pearls.
Long before I identified as a lesbian, people were identifying me as a dyke (un-reclaimed). Not because I was holding hands with or kissing another female, but because my external gender expression has always been “masculine” -- short hair, no make up, scraped knees, big burger bites. My internal sense of gender, however, has always been “feminine” -- emotional, intuitive, nurturing, gentle, apologetic. I am peaceful with and celebrate this dissonance; others, however, seem to struggle.
In
Queer because it captures my politics and desire for social and economic justice for all. I like Eve Sedgwick’s definition of Queer: “The open mesh of possibilities, gaps, overlaps, dissonances and resonances, lapses and excesses of meaning when the constituent elements of anyone’s gender, of anyone’s sexuality aren’t made (or can’t be made) to signify monolithically.”
Feminist because I support choice—the choice to explore, express, transgress and transcend gender.
Lesbian because I am a strong woman who passionately loves another strong woman...and the culture of strong women.
And woman...because I want to expand the definition to include girls and women who look, eat, sit, spit, throw, cry, dress and run down the stairs....just like me. I want that 4-year-old girl to always take big bites of her potato chip sandwich, without shame or apology :)
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
That's So Gay

When something comes in threes, I pay attention. There has been a pattern to my messages about the power of language this week.
First, I received an email from a social justice listserve about a CBS article titled, “Support for Gays in the Military Depends on the Question.” The article reported that a CBS News/ New York Times poll finds that the wording of the question is key when it comes to determining whether Americans support allowing gays to serve in the military:
"When referred to as "homosexuals," 44 percent favor allowing them to serve openly. When referred to as "gay men and lesbians," the percentage rises to 58 percent.”
Next, I received an email from The DailyOM called, “Words Have Weight:” It stated:
“Words carry energy and this gives language its power and its potential to heal or hurt. When we carefully listen to others before we speak, our words have more integrity, and when we take time to center ourselves before speaking, we truly begin to harness the power of speech.”
Finally, I received an email about a piece in the 'Daily Camera' called, “Think, then talk: Cleaning up language just common courtesy” by Linda Campbell:
" 'That's just retarded' and 'That's so gay' have become all-purpose put-downs, used in contexts that have nothing to do with cognitively challenged or homosexual individuals.” (click here to see an excellent public service announcement by Wanda Sykes about "That's so gay")
The article highlights this coming March 3rd as the second "Spread the Word to End the Word" Awareness Day, which states “Our language frames how we think about others.” The website asks people to “Pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities."
The three articles all made me think about language and the LGBTQ and Allied community. I thought about
- The words “queer,” “dyke,” “fag” and “tranny” and how they are embraced and celebrated by some, and are rejected by and repulsive to others.
- How Rosie O’Donnell and Ellen DeGeneres, during their public coming out processes, referred to themselves as “gay women” rather than lesbians (Remember the "Yep, I'm Gay" Time Magazine cover?).
- How I cringe when I hear the phrase “gay lifestyle.”
- "Partner" vs "lover" vs "wife" vs "husband" vs "significant other" vs "spouse."
- People in the community who I have heard say, “LGBTQIAWLJFwhatever alphabet soup” dismissively and with exasperation.
- Euphemisms we have used: "In the life," "family" and "friend of Dorothy." (others?)
- How my mom referred to me as a "lezzie" and how that felt.
- LGBTQ and Allied people who I have heard use the phrase, “That’s so lame.”
- ‘Marriage’ vs ‘Civil Union’ vs “Domestic Partner’ vs “Designated Beneficiary.”
- How the radical religious right always refers to the LGBTQ and Allied community as “homosexuals” and why…
- and I thought about LGBTQ vs GLBTQ.
The DailyOM piece concluded:
“For the next few days, you might want to practice noticing how the words you say and hear affect your body and your emotional state. Notice how the different communication styles of the people in your life make you feel. Also, watch closely to see how your own words come out and what affect they have on the people around you.”
Give it a try and let us know :) What did you notice?
Saturday, February 13, 2010
We love when simply loving is the most radical act there is...

“I was once asked why I don't participate in anti-war demonstrations.
I said that I will never do that, but as soon as you have a pro-peace rally, I'll be there.”
– Mother Teresa
I offer this thought because I sometimes worry the LGBTQ and Allied movement has become defined by what we are against: we wage battles, we fight, we struggle, we protest. And indeed, there have been valid and vital reasons to fight. But do we know who we are as a community when we are not fighting?
Perhaps when discrimination, violence and harassment against the LGBTQ community ends, we will just be getting started.
Rather than defining the LGBTQ community by what we are against, what if we started to think about our community in terms of what we are for? What are the gifts and talents that LGBTQ people have to teach others? Why else might we want to gather as a community that doesn’t involve protests? As Buckminister Fuller said, "You never change something by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."
We are incredibly strong and resilient people who, despite negative social messages and institutionalized discrimination, not only ‘come out’ and survive – but thrive. We love when simply loving is the most radical act there is - whether it is loving ourselves fully and honestly for who we are or loving another.
What does it mean to start creating a community vision that is based in our strengths, our love, and what we are for?




