A picture is worth a thousand words, but I’m neither a photographer or a painter. As long as I can remember I have sketched images using language.

Welcome to my canvas.

Kiehl's: Some doggone fun with Truman Brooks
April 14, 2009 in | Comments (0)

Click to Play

The Power of Persuasion: From Camp Courage to Kinnernet
March 26, 2009 in Other Than That - news, business & other nonsense | Comments (0)

What's your story?

That's a question one might hear when meeting someone new. It's a blanket query designed to get someone to share a tale that represents who they are.

The world in which I live takes its direction from the professional - meaning that oftentimes when the question is posed, it's in the context of what one does rather than who they are. But the truth, especially in today's world, is that the story of who you are - your fears, hopes, dreams, ambitions - plays a critical role in your overall ability to communicate what it is that you *do*.

And if we're talking about the world of innovation, technology and start-ups, this ability becomes even more critical. So many people try to create a "story" about their business, something that catches attention. Not only is this a bad idea because of what could happen if the story is found to be something other than truly authentic, it's a bad idea because these stories have no real foundation, they are not part of the individual's or business' DNA.

By finding a way to connect with *your* story and integrate that into all you do one not only gains a stronger sense of self, but in doing so the story will have exponentially deeper impact.

So, as somehow who's always considered herself rather adept on the tale telling front, you can imagine my surprise when I found that I had a hard time doing this myself.

It was the end of January. I was in LA for Camp Courage and we began an exercise on the "story of self". And I found myself strangely at a loss for words.

Yes. You heard that correctly. Me. At a loss for words.

Okay you can stop laughing now.

Really.

The truth is that while I can tell stories about pretty much anything, and I don't exactly shy from sharing tales, whether personal or professional; my story - specifically about my identity as an out, lesbian woman - just isn't in my repertoire.

What, you may ask, does my being gay have to do with personal story in business? Simple. While it may not be relevant on a day to day basis in my work, the truth is that it is still deeply part of who I am. It colors how I view things - just as the fact that I'm Jewish tempers my perspectives, and my being from the East Coast, and my being a dog lover ... all of these, along with the myriad other ingredients baked into the multi-layer cake of me, matter ...

The trick is, how to best integrate all that is me with what I do, in a way that is relevant.

Some might say that in order to live a life that is truly "authentic", it's imperative that you engage with others in a deeply personal way. Don't be afraid to be vulnerable and share.

For the record, I don't disagree with that. At least not at face value. The part where things get sticky, I think, is that spot where people shuffle, skip, step and sometimes full-on leap over that razor-thin but generally well-defined line of "appropriate."

In other words, just because you have the ability to blast your every thought and opinion far and wide, doesn't necessarily mean that's the right thing to do.

So how to balance? How to share something that is deeply part of who you are while at the same time maintaining some semblance of ... well ... social decorum and then how to best bring that story home and weave it into the fabric of all you do?

It’s about willingness to take time, examine your life experience and be able to polish that. If you can tell your story “with feeling from the heart” you can talk to anyone … and they will feel it.

It's about learning how to excavate your life for those gem-like moments. Those times when you encountered a challenge and had to make a choice and then what was the outcome.

This weekend I'll be leading a workshop on this very subject - trying to take what I've learned in my own story-telling education and bring it to the digital denizens of Kinnernet.

No doubt there will be great stories to share ...

Giving back: Mentoring for Female Entrepreneurs
February 17, 2009 in Other Than That - news, business & other nonsense | Comments (0)

If you're an inexperienced entrepreneur you face some pretty serious obstacles - especially in an economy like today.

If you're a woman, that challenge just increased exponentially.

I hate to say it, but it's true. While there is no question that the roles and opportunities for women in business are a hell of a lot better than they were even just five to ten years ago, the sad fact is that women are still woefully underrepresented in all too many fields.

But don't worry, this isn't yet another feminist rant about the plight of women in the professional realm. (Though I do have one of those percolating right now.) This is about some women who stepped up several months ago to do something about it, and now are stepping up again.

And, for the record, I'm one of them.

It's Pink Garage Mentors - and we're a group of seasoned founders, VCs and C level execs who help female entrepreneurs planning or in the process of applying to tech incubators. About a half dozen months ago the always-in-motion Susan Mernit sent out a missive to some women she knew, asking if we would be interested/able/willing to take part in something designed to help foster women in business.

The response was a collective and emphatic virtual nod from all.

We worked with a few entrepreneurs, and the response was great - including outreach from several seasoned women who have joined the mentoring ranks.

In terms of what we "do", that's pretty simple too. Our posse reads and helps refine applications pre submission, and provides virtual coaching to serious applicants.

Presently we're focused on TechStars (deadline - March 21, 2009) and YCombinator (deadline - March 18, 2009) applicants.

If you would like a mentor for your TechStars and/or yCombinator application, email pinkgaragementors@gmail.com with a copy of your application and you'll be matched with a mentor.

And who knows, maybe that'll be me. :)

Bathing in Silver: Reminders sparked by the moon
February 11, 2009 in It is what it is - opinion column | Comments (0)

Wednesday night's moon was spectacular.

Perhaps not quite as remarkable as the full moon that rose earlier this week, but pretty damn breathtaking. After the thick and stormy skies parted there he was - the perpetually surprised Man in the Moon glancing down sideways from his waning recline ... as if from under an oversized hoodie.

Funny.

Hmmm. Interesting thought, but for the purpose of this post not relevant, so moving on ...

I'm blessed with a pretty spectacular view from my apartment. So on nights like this, when the entire cityscape takes on the luminous cast of silver, I make a point of turning out all the lights, cozying my favorite chair right ... up ... to the eastern facing window, and basking in that glow.

I've been in this apartment for a long time and experienced quite a few of these mooncast scenes, but tonight it was different. Perhaps I never experienced such bright moonlight so close to a rain; and so never caught the reflection from the scattered collection of rainwater pools.

In a flash, that wide path of moonlight stretching across the rooftops below, became a glistening silver band across the dark Atlantic. The deep whoosh of cars, their rushing pattern set by the streetlights, began to echo with the rumbling hiss of waves crashing onto the shoreline just below the Boardwalk where I stood with my father.

I was about 10 years old. We had just come back from a long dinner at our favorite Atlantic City (NJ) restaurants, Doc's Oyster House. Often after a big meal, the family would go for a long walk on the Boardwalk. Sometimes we'd walk where the "action" was - the casinos, amusement piers, that sort of thing. Best part of that was that invariably it also meant a trip to Dairy Queen or, even better for some water ice.

But other times we'd head back towards our house, and "walk the Boards" there, which essentially meant a quiet, salt-air-scented stroll with nothing more than the occasional pool of streetlights and whatever moonlight you might get. As much as I love ice cream, this was always my preferred path.

And on night's like tonight, the view was breathtaking. And on a night like tonight we wouldn't have been out there alone. The Boardwalk would have been jammed with people - whether weekday or weeknight - reveling in the fresh air and the view.

When that ridiculously fat, full moon broke above the horizon this week, glowing so enormous and pregnant in the sky it almost seemed perched on the top of the Transamerica Pyramid - not a soul was looking up. In fact, since I was driving, I put the top down on the car, and at every red light I very obviously stared up several times just to see if anyone else would.

No one did.

As I was driving and unable to text, I made a frantic series of (hands-free, of course) phone calls to some friends - two of whom texted back soon thereafter with thanks for having pointed their glance upward.

It's a good thing to remember.

Just because you're focused diligently on your future, and just because you have to pay attention to what's in front of you, don't forget to look up.

Never know what you might see.

Twitter mosaic: A fun tapestry of my friends
February 11, 2009 in It is what it is - opinion column | Comments (0)

Just caught a Tweet about this ever-so-cool site that allows you to create a mosaic of your Twitter followers and then print it on t-shirts, mugs, bags or business cards.

You also can snare the embed code and put it on your blog.

Like this:

Get your twitter mosaic here.

The community asks - and on 2/5 No on 8 EC members will answer
February 05, 2009 in It is what it is - opinion column | Comments (1)

It's 1:00am. I'm exhausted. But the energy coming from the emails, blog comments and Twitter messages makes the idea of sleep just now very hard.

In preparation for Thursday afternoon's discussion with No on 8 Executive Committee members Kate Kendell, Geoff Kors and Tawal Panyacosit, I'm grokking tons of data bits in the interest of trying to ensure we cover as much ground as possible.

In addition to the questions below - and with thanks to Jo Hoenninger, acting President of Marriage Equality USA; and Jay Matthew of Erase the H8 in Fresno - I've also been given the raw list of questions that went unanswered during the No on 8 Executive Committee session at last month's Equality Summit in LA. It's an 11-page list that Jo is hoping to clean up, flesh out with a full complement of answers and ultimately post online. In the mean time, I'll be folding in as many of the questions as possible to the Thursday afternoon conversation.

***Some things to know about how things will go on Thursday***

1) CAPTURING THE CONVERSATION: I will be recording (video and audio) of the session. In addition, we will be doing a live video stream of the entire conversation. To access that live stream, which will start at 2:00pm Pacific time on Thursday, February 5, 2009, go to my profile page at Qik.com. The featured video on that page is the current or most recent stream. If you're seeing a video entitled "Final test" then we haven't started quite yet.

2) COMMENTING WITHIN THE CHAT: The live stream site includes a chat room. If you are viewing the stream you have the ability to type in questions. I will monitor that as best possible during the conversation to take any new questions that might arise.

3) COMMENTING BY TWITTER: Please mark any Tweets related to this discussion with #marriageequality. I will monitor the Tweet stream as best possible for any additional questions that arise.

4) WHEN IT'S DONE: When we finish the session I will embed the entire video here. You can feel free to repurpose.

With that, here are the questions that were submitted on this site, at Other Than That and as comments on Facebook.

Comments submitted at EqualityCamp.com

Not sure from whom, precisely, but comment links to the site for LA Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence:
1: To what degree do you suppose the current, long-standing disquiet is being fed by the perception that the people of EQCA (who, we were told, 'did their best') have resisted accountability for their best not being good enough? That is: had any of you come forward with a sincere, unqualified mea culpa immediately, taken your lumps (even if undeserved) might we have been willing to 'move forward' with EQCA?

2: What changes have been made to EQCA, to board membership or to policy? Given the current perception, (that EQCA has neither learned or changed) why should EQCA still be considered a viable organization?

Richard (aka Willingthrall) asks:
Do you think No-on-8 would have benefited from pointing out that the Netherlands has had same-sex marriages for some time with no ill effects on the social fabric. Or would the right-wingers have decided to nitpick something about Dutch society?

Comments submitted at OtherThanThat.com

Jennifer Rinkenberger - Central Valley Regional Director (co-) for Yes! On Equality (aka Progressive Mama Blogger) asks:
The No On 8 campaign made a deliberate and public decision to ignore the Central Valley. Taking David Binder's recent report at face value, and understanding that demographics of Valley voters closely resemble the movable 6-7% of the electorate. What plans do you have to reach out to the Central Valley LGBT community? Many activists wrongly attacked the African-American community in the wake of Prop 8's passage. Those attacks brought some long seated resentment between LGBT people of color and white LGBT people, issues that obviously need to be addressed, to the surface.

However, I am concerned that the guilt regarding the initial reactions attacking people of color is going to translate into a campaign strategy that continues to ignore the geographic majority of the state -- the Central Valley. The Prop 8 campaign was run on the premise that if the Coastal counties could be carried the rest of the state could be ignored. Is the new campaign going to be to focus on communities of color in the Coastal counties...so that the rest of the state can continue to be ignored?

What plans have you for paid staff and an office of operations in the Central Valley?

What plans have you for including members of the Valley on your Executive Committees and boards?

What steps have you taken to diversify the people who make decisions for your organizations, beyond ensuring that all ethnicities and sexual identities are represented?

The Binder report says that voters that are influenced by discussions with LGBT people were more likely to vote no on 8, whereas voters influenced by religion were more likely to vote yes. It seems to me that talking to people of faith, in the language of faith, is something we need to do as a major component of any future campaign. What plans does EQCA have to work with groups like the California Council of Churches, who have developed a curriculum for discussing same-sex marriage from the faith perspective? The Binder report also suggests that gay and lesbian people and families are not effective messengers for marriage equality, at least on t.v. -- which is where most people get their messaging.

One of the major criticisms of the No On 8 campaign was the lack of LGBT family presence. Assuming we take the Binder report at face value and cede that we are not our best spokespeople -- has there been any consideration to reaching out to a handful of straight allies/clergy to serve as spokespeople in future campaigns and PSA's in an offensive/preemptive ad campaign, so that we can frame the issue and debate instead of being so reactionary?

If the Supreme Court fails to overturn Prop 8 and Yes! On Equality succeeds in getting marriage equality back on the ballot in 2010, we're going to be running a campaign during a midterm election, a cycle that is far more likely to attract older, whiter, conservative voters, than younger ones.

What do you think the priorities of such a campaign should be? Focusing energy and resources on trying to draw out younger voters, or tailoring a message that chips away at the stranglehold that some religious communities have on their members and hoping that some of that message trickles down to youth and other democratic minorities?

Catalina Ruiz-Healy - San Francisco
I would like to know why the gamble was made on "there are more of us than them", which is my understanding of what the strategy was. You need to pick a strategy, and that's cool. And one makes the wrong call sometimes. But I would like to better understand what data they used, knowing that Obama was going to be on the ticket and how this would affect turnout.

Also, I feel like there was absolutely NO reach out to straight women, Latinas, or anyone else who could have helped bridge the "them" divide. Calls were made only to perceived "friendlies" and I understand having to focus, but there was no reason surrogates couldn't be sent to churches, CBOs and other places to at least help frame the issue and start a discussion at home.

Jason Scott – Marriage Equality USA/Gay Fresno - Fresno
Why were calls for ANY money or ANY staff to be sent to Fresno (or anywhere in the central valley for that matter) completely unanswered. We were told we should drive up to San Francisco or down to Los Angeles to help out with the "offical" campaign. Why were our super volunteers offered paid work in San Francisco and taken away from our area.

We were bombarded with emails to send money to the campaign, but why was no support coming back to us?

In the interest in moving past this, will the leadership here today agree that this will never happen again? Apologies were made for many mistakes, but never for this one. We'd like to move past it, but even after election day, Lorri Jean from the campaign stated that "Focusing on the areas with the most votes" was done and was done "rightfully so". (Quote taken at 42:42 minutes in the Prop 8 Town Hall audio.)

Mariva – San Francisco Bay Area
1. Many people with political organizing and campaign experience tried to help with the No on 8 campaign on an organizational and strategic level, and yet there was no avenue for them to have a dialog with you. Why didn't you take feedback and suggestions from the LGBT and/or political organizing community? Why did you rely solely on the "wisdom" of focus groups, which proved to be deeply flawed?

2. Why wasn't there an immediate effort to launch a competing initiative, one with a similar description to Prop. 8 (e.g., "Protect Marriage") but with the exact opposite language therein? This worked very effectively with Prop. 99 against Prop. 98 (the so-called "eminent domain"/repeal rent control initiative). This tactic -- one among many -- was an obvious tenet of California Initiative Strategy 101, but no one seemed to think of it. Why didn't the No on 8 campaign work with experts with this type of ballot initiative experience and savvy?

3. On November 4, 2008, there was a No on 8 campaign visibility effort, but absolutely no GOTV effort. GOTV is one of the most important parts of a campaign -- and it should be taken care of *before* committing any volunteers to campaign visibility. The turnout in San Francisco was appallingly low. Why didn't the No on 8 campaign have volunteers dragging voters out of their homes to get them to the polls within 96 hours of Election Day?

Deirdre Saoirse Moen
I just want to say: thanks to everyone working for equality for LGBTs. I don't have any questions, but just wanted to offer warm fuzzy support.

I'd also like to point out my husband's article that points out that there are even apparent straight couples affected by prop 8, and not to ignore them: Right now, they're probably very in the closet, and if they know, they're probably very hurt.

Heather
Our community didn't reach out very well to religious institutions and ethnicities among others, nor did we refute in any way many flat-out lies. What sorts of things can we do besides a vague "talk to people" to try and change this? (e.g. make materials about this to hand out for people to read, go door to door in our neighborhoods and talk with everyone, explain why allowing gay marriage doesn't infringe on rights, use science studies to show that being gay is not a "lifestyle choice", etc...)

Jere Keyes
With so much community focus on the shortcomings of the campaign, are there any decisions that you continue to stand behind even if they are unpopular with LGBT people? What things were absolutely done right and should be done again in future elections?

Lisa Lindsay
What was with not being trained to talk to actual people when going door-to-door? Was this because I'm in the Central Valley where there were no resources (i.e. no paid staff who might do training on how to do a face-to-face conversation) or did we really people doing the work of a postage stamp everywhere?

What research was done to indicate not showing the face of real gay people in a commercial was going I be what "wins"? What research was done to indicate where money/resources should be spent? What will be done differently? What are the mistakes that won't be repeated?

Do you have any (expletive deleted) idea how it feels to live in a town where their are signs opposing your marriage being handed out every Sunday, and then to have friends who want to show support for your side (so much so that they'll pay the $10) to the not even be able to find the one god damn office that has signs?

Sonnie
Looking backwards, I am one of the ones who was angry and frustrated with the campaign. The deliberate decision to exclude 18,000 real live same-sex couples who legally and joyfully married during the available window was hurtful. I believe there should have been a parade of these people, their friends and family members. It was no less than internalized homophobia disguised as "political strategy" to take this action. We cannot live in fear. We must demonstrate that our lives are all about love.

One thing I also must say: I attended the Equality Summit, starting the day angry; but as things continued, even though my anger continued, I have to give credit to the members of the No on 8 Executive Committee for their willingness to sit in front of a large group of frustrated and furious people in the way they did. We need to move forward.

Comments from Facebook

Marivi Lerdo de Tejada – San Francisco
I think it is important, no, critical, to understand what mistakes were made so we can move forward with the campaign. But I'm not sure conducting a witch hunt is helfpul. Silicon Valley is full of *very* successful people who had equally spectacular failures, precisely because you learn more from your failures than from your success. Can we focus on the strategic and tactical mistakes and use them to chart a better course instead of looking for scapegoats?

Michael Mullin
Voting No on 8 could have been a vote for the status quo/ no change... which in our world seems (often sadly) to be a pretty easy sell. Learning from loss makes sense. Finding blame within the gay marriage proponents world seems like a divisive energy drain. Infighting makes the left relatively effete. We could be identifying common denominators among fellow Obama supporters, lending our support and building energy with them for shared causes. Right now it feels like the larger conversation is still located in a Republican context despite the opportunity to shift reference points to a Democratic one. When manipulating policy through fear and ignorance becomes marginal then those players will be motivated to become part of the change. As we move into a new paradigm Prop 8 will look more and more outlandish and ultimately, naturally be overturned.

Katherine Keon
Not too original however a constant in my mind...how to effectively organize is a big one here...often reiterated as the down fall to the last go and spoken about as the key to the next round however how to do it better must be understood in relation to the issue. I think it is critical to discover / develop, and I think it is both, a method of organizing that is unique to the issue. i think that we can learn truck loads from the obama organizing drive and the successful technicalities to that process AND i think we need to think about the issue itself and the way in which it is held in society, how gays are held in society at this juncture in time and organize based on what is there.

--- Cathy

What would YOU ask: A Q&A Session with some of the No on 8 Exec. Committee
February 02, 2009 in It is what it is - opinion column | Comments (18)

NOTE: In the interest of best aggregating all the input, comments on this post are now closed. The next post which will outline the bulk of the questions and themes people have proffered will be open for further discussion.

In addition - you can tune in online to the live stream of the conversation on Thursday, 2/5. Chat will be enabled for this stream so you can ask questions during the interview as well.

Regardless of the camp in which you sit, consensus pretty much confirms - the No on 8 campaign had problems ... lots of them.

For starters, we lost.

Actually the "starters" lay within the snarled set of issues - call them mistakes, errors, miscommunications, snafus, misfires it doesn't really matter - that led to the way in which this (not-such) comedy of errors played out. For the record, I fall somewhere just off center on this. I'm pissed at how things turned out. Who wouldn't be? (Well, except for those who won, of course.) There were many points along the way where I saw plenty of things not going the right way. There were points along the way where, through conversations with others who were more deeply engaged than I, it was clear that the campaign was in trouble.

Many people - both those who continue to speak out as well as others who at this point are silent in shades of disgust - want a public accounting by the No on 8 Executive Committee on what happened - accepting responsibility, identifying mistakes ... that sort of thing. There have been posts calling out the members (once they were identified), demanding apologies and clamoring for answers. The dissenting voices, whose deeply persistent murmur rose to a particularly explosive cadence during last months' EqualitySummit, call for a public forum.

While I do not disagree that such a thing *should* happen, I'm concerned that the reality of it is slim to none and that a lot of time may be wasted in trying to make it take place. As I understand it there are "a few" members of the EC who have already flat out refused doing such a public thing - whether a live forum or a public statement. (Personally, I'd like to know who those people are so that we can remove them from the process moving forward. Anyone who cannot take accountability has no business leading ... but that is an issue for another post...).

So, I've been trying to think of ways to at least begin to mitigate this deep anger while trying to stay productive and forward looking at the same time. Participation in Equality Summit and Courage Campaign's Camp Courage went a long way towards that end. In the time since then, I've witnessed an incredible array of coalition building, team efforts underway and a wonderful sense that this community may well pull itself together in a unified effort.

But people are still upset. So what to do about that?

With that, I have taken it upon myself to attempt something this coming Thursday, February 5.

At 2:00pm Pacific this Thursday, 2/5 I am going to be sitting down with Kate Kendell, Geoff Kors and Tawal Panyacosit - three members of the No on 8 EC. It's *possible* that one or two other EC members might attend as well, but I have confirmed these three.

The entirety of this conversation will be on a live stream and I'll also have my various social network platforms open and fired up with the intention of giving as many people as wish to participate at least some open forum in which to talk with at least some of the EC members.

In the interest of trying to put at least a bit of structure around the questions (not to edit, but to manage what I'm hoping will be a lot of input!) I'm hoping to solicit as many questions as possible in the next 24 hours. My plan will then be to put those question up on a live poll and have people vote on those questions with the intention of asking as many of them as possible in the order that people have indicated is important to them ...

My intention here is really to try and foster some sort of facilitated dialogue that can be productive. I may fail, but I feel that I must try.

One person to whom I reached out already has said that short of a complete and public (e.g. an in person Town Hall type) hearing they have no interest in helping spread the word about this Thursday's discussion. If this is your perspective as well, I wholly appreciate and respect that.

If, however, you feel that having at least this virtual public gathering can help serve to forward the idea of gaining some more public closure (which was started at EqualitySummit), I would truly appreciate your help.

And doing so is very simple:

1) Please spread the word. Your assistance in forwarding the link to this can only mean more people have a chance to speak up.

2) Submit a comment here. The comments will close at 9:00am Pacific time on Wednesday, February 4. PLEASE MAKE SURE AND LEAVE ME A REAL EMAIL ADDRESS so that I can contact you for step 3.

3) I will aggregate the questions from here (as well as from the the EqualityCamp site and Facebook - where I've also posted this) and then will publish a public poll. That poll will be open from 9am pacific time on Wednesday 2/4 through 12:00pm Pacific time on Thursday, February 5.

I'll post a note and contact everyone who's submitted questions with a link to the live stream for Thursday and hope you'll not only forward that link liberally but also can take the time to participate.

Will this resolve the concern and angst in the community, that would be an awfully lofty goal. If that can be accomplished, great. That pragmatic voice in my head says that this is really only a start, but in taking a step, hopefully we can all begin to truly move forward.

EqualitySummit: Research Study from David Binder on Proposition 8 Campaign
January 24, 2009 in It is what it is - opinion column | Comments (0)

Here I sit, alongside two of my fellow EqualityCamp organizers (for the record, that would be Heather Gold and Adina Levin, sadly for various reasons Hillary Hartley and Tara Hunt were unable to hop the caravan.) at EqualitySummit in LA.

Today's opening session is a collection of voices from the 2008 election cycle and the (now notorious) efforts executed (or not, as some say) for the No on 8 campaign.

But I'm a rather lousy live-blogger, so won't attempt to encapsulate the session now, rather I wanted to proffer a tidbit from one of the press releases they gave me ... It's about a research report from David Binder Research. He'll be speaking a bit later, and I'm hoping to snare a few minutes on video with him, but in advance of that here's a tidbit:

The headline reads: "Prop 8 Study Reveals Conversations with Friends, Family, Co-workers, Most Influential in Driving 'NO' vote."

Gosh there's a shocker.

You mean actually meeting and getting to know real people and hearing real stories may have impact in winning hearts and minds? Sorry if I sound a bit bitter, but isn't that precisely what any good effort towards social change endeavors to accomplish?

Okay, so how about this next tidbit that came in the sub-headline of the release:

"Study finds 73% of people who voted for Prop. 8 said nothing could've changed their vote."

This, also, doesn't really surprise me ... what surprised me is that the release buried a point that I think matters more... On the second page of the release, in the second to last paragraph is this:

"Only about 15% of yes on 8 voters could name something tangible that could cause them to change their mind and support same sex marriage, including:
- Call marriage by another name
- Ensure marriage for same-sex couples will not be taught in schools
- Ensure churches will not be forced to perform same sex marriages
- Approval, or lack of formal opposition, from churches or religious leaders"

This says two things to me:

1) It reconfirms my belief that while focusing efforts on changing those minds is a waste of energy, that does not mean we should not endeavor to engage with that community ... This is pretty much my take away after the ever-so-educational interaction with The Rev. Chauncey Killens at EqualityCamp.

2) There are points outlined above that may be worth at least considering, if for no other reason than at least understanding what kind of middle ground might be acceptable. I'm not suggesting we acquiesce, but I do believe that within our strength we need to avoid stridency and strive to find middle ground.

Sometimes it doesn't take many words: A Twitter-esque occasion
January 23, 2009 in It is what it is - opinion column | Comments (0)

On Wednesday morning I hopped into the car with Truman and pointed my way southbound on US-101 headed for Los Angeles.

A couple of hours into the journey, I approached one of those signs heralding my impending entry to a town. The kelly green sign loomed large:

Chualar, CA
Population 1,440. Elevation 110' (above sea level).

1,440.

Weird.

There are more people than that following me on Twitter.

Part of me feels as though that last sentence should be where I end this post, and perhaps it is. (By all means feel free to chime in and comment on that - and anything else for that matter .) The part of me compelled to continue (which of course is the part that oftentimes wins) has one point to make:

In recent weeks it has become abundantly clear I have quite a lot for which to be thankful. Some deeply irksome matters (largely personal in nature) rendered the tail end of '08 ... Well, let's just say the tail may have wagged the dog a few times. But as that proverbial calendar page flipped and I had to get used to writing a new last digit for the year in my journal, a remarkable shift has taken place. And one reason I've been able to muscle through this tectonic exercise, is social media - both the tools/platforms and the people who make and use them.

Okay so maybe that's more like two reasons. But you get the idea.

Glenn Close, personal space and a walk down Sutter Street
January 17, 2009 in It is what it is - opinion column | Comments (0)

I met Glenn Close on Wednesday.

Well, "met" may be a slight exaggeration.

There was no handshake or "Nice to meet you Glenn, I'm Cathy," sort of exchange. But we did walk an entire city block and cross two intersections together; and if I were measuring my encounter with her by the terms of social networks and Web 2.0 technologies, she and I are practically best friends now.

Of course that's ridiculous, but the experience did make me rethink just what it means to balance personal space with being part of this always connected world in which we live.

It began when I spotted her standing at the corner of Stockton and Sutter streets (the southeast corner in front of the Starbucks, to be specific). It was just before 9:30am and I was heading for Sears Fine Food and Jeff Pulver's Social Media Jungle breakfast.

The previous night I watched the season two premiere of Damages, the F/X series that Ms. Close kicked off last year. Her character, Patty Hewes, is a vicious litigator whose threadbare ethics seem wrapped around a deeply moral core. She may play dirty, but in the end it appears that all she really wants is justice. Or she's pathologically evil. You're never really sure, and that's part of the intrigue.

I love this show and have talked about this character often - and there she was. Well, there was the woman who plays the role that I enjoy so much. It felt a perfect opportunity to thank this wonderful actress for her work.

But I didn't.

In fact, I stood on the corner next to her and didn't say a word. Not then and not as we walked down the block. For the uninitiated, I'm not exactly the most shy retiring sort, so one might ask how it's possible that I could have walked the entire length of Union Square just about arm's length from one of my favorite actresses of all times and not speak to her?

Simple.

She didn't look like she wanted to talk with anyone. From the moment I noticed her, she had about as inward facing body language as you can imagine. She cast her eyes around a bit, but for the most part kept her gaze fixed slightly down and in front.

Even her physical stance seemed muted. When the light changed and we stepped from the curb, she did so gingerly and seemed to be moving in the manner of someone just off a physical injury of some sort – a stark contradiction to the powerful strides of Patty Hewes.

Whether her insular focus was due to not feeling well, having a bad day or perhaps just not having had her morning coffee was irrelevant. She just seemed like she didn't want to be interrupted. So I left her alone.

My pace was slightly faster so I reached the next intersection about 20 steps ahead. As I stood there a nattily dressed fellow in a splendid pair of boots walked up. I complimented his attire, we chatted a moment and as we finished, Ms. Close reached the corner standing next to me.

With the light about to change, I began to turn towards the intersection myself, and that's when it happened. Another passer-by caught sight of Ms. Close on the corner. And after uttering a squeal of delight this woman fairly leapt to the curbside next to Ms. Close, grabbed her arm and chortled, "Oh my GOD, I just LOVE your work. You are just DIVINE, and ..."

My glance shot immediately to Ms. Close to see her reaction and watched as her initial wide-eyed surprise (tinged with fear, I think) melted quickly into a most gracious countenance, albeit with a slightly frozen smile.

An eternity passed, the light changed and with a quick thank you, Ms. Close gently extricated her arm from the woman's grasp and stepped into Powell Street. Matching her stride, I found myself shoulder to shoulder (well, not quite, as she's quite a bit more petite than I had thought), crossing the street. Without turning to her directly, and keeping my voice in a low, modulated tone (appropriate for the close proximity with which we stood) I took a deep breath and spoke to her.

"Of course, I recognized you a block or so back, but you really seemed to be having a personal moment and I didn't want to interrupt."

I paused and watched for a reaction. Ms. Close did a double take and I found myself on the receiving end of a deeply genuine smile and the unmistakable blue sparkle from behind her sunglasses. I felt the door was still open, so I continued: "I've been a fan of your work for some time, and love so many of the characters you've played, but that Patty Hewes, she's just deliciously duplicitous. I adore her."

Then I grinned.

By this point we had reached the other side of Powell and Ms. Close had stopped next to me as I finished. She nodded at my description of the character, said thank you and met my grin. Then she gave my arm a squeeze, leveled a slightly more serious smile my way, paused and repeated: "Thank you." Then she walked into the Walgreens and I continued to Jeff's breakfast.

The whole thing took less than a couple of minutes to transpire, and yet it sat with me throughout the morning and into the afternoon. What was it about this that was niggling on my brain so much? And more to the point that you may be wondering right about now: What on earth does this have to do with technology?

Both good questions, and there's a common answer.

It used to be that famous people - whether actors, politicians, business people or any other ilk - were deemed more important if for no other reason than they had the ability to gain the attention of a large audience. The American culture still puts a great degree (too much if you ask me) of importance on fame, but the truth is that today's hyper-connectivity puts more and more people into a position more like that of Ms. Close than ever before.

We have truly Internet famous people who are in effect a collective MiniMe for real celebrities (think those whose Twitter followers lay in the tends of thousands). Out in the "real" world, these folks are relatively unknowns (most of them) but in our little echo chamber they are celebrities. And then thanks to social media, regular old folks like you and me are watched, or in geek vernacular "followed" every day. The number of people watching may be exponentially smaller for the average person, but the nature of that watching is no less intense.

In some cases the watchful eyes are familiar, but quite often those eyes belong to strangers ... strangers to whom we've granted an open door to our lives - or at least part of them. Suddenly there are people who feel (accurately or not) they know who you are, because they have constant access to "how" you are (or at least to what you're doing at any given moment).

This means that on some level each and every one of us can appreciate or understand that even in a world that's always connected, every person deserves an opportunity to unplug. And sometimes that opportunity doesn't come at a far-flung spa but walking down a moderately populated city street.

My lesson from this experience is that even though we may choose to splay much of our lives onto platforms where many people can see, hear and share with us, that does not - or at least should not - preclude the very basic social practices taught before you were judged by how many email addresses you have.

In as much as we stride forward using these technologies, embracing them and all the sticky, complex connectivity that result we cannot forget that in order to inhabit our own individual space, we need to be mindful of the fact that others need their space too.