I don't understand why the LGBT community would want someone who is not well qualified to evaluate the dynamics of their relationships to be providing such a service to them. It would probably turn into a disaster (because of shortcomings in such unqualified evaluations) and result in a lot more lawsuits from people being 'mismatched' because of those shortcomings. Those lawsuits would probably be far more justified.
There are plenty of sites that do offer this service and could have been developed by people who are far more qualified to do it.
The students of Gallaudet University underwent DPN (Deaf President Now) to bring about the first deaf president of Gallaudet University because they wanted their education to be managed by someone who understood (from having lived it) the problems faced by the Deaf community (if you do not know about DPN, you should read a book entitled 'The Week The World Heard Gallaudet'). They did not want the Hearing (who did not live the Deaf experience) to be the ultimate manager of their education (this did not mean that teachers from the Hearing community could not teach them, just that they wanted their deaf leader to be the ultimate manager of their educational affairs). Would not the LGBT community want their own qualified professionals to do the same for them and not rely on someone who hasn't lived their own experience?
It makes very little sense to me. I would liken it to going to a podiatrist to be evaluated for a problem with your hands (the dynamics are not the same).
It would probably require Dr. Neil Clark Warren go back to pyschology school to study a new speciality (or do a bunch of costly independent research) to resolve this issue. I'm not entirely sure that that is fair to him especially since other specialists are already more qualified to do it. Why should he reinvent the wheel? The result would probably not be as good as with someone who lived the experience.
So now do we sue general practitioners for discrimination because they do not provide pyschological services? Would you not be better suited to choose an experienced mental health practitioner?
Do we sue psychologists who specialize in child psychology for not providing counseling to adults as well? These adults can get refered to a psychologist that specialize in their dynamics.
Do we sue magazines that specialize in writing about the Black community for not writing about the White or Hispanic communities? Or do we subscribe to a magazine that writes articles about events in our own respective communities?
Do we sue Yahoo or Google for not providing dictionary services when we could go to dictionary.com or m-w.com for those services?
Do we sue the Reverend Farrakhan for not providing ministries to Protestants or Catholics? What about atheists and agnostics?
How about The Washington Blade? Do we sue them because they exclusively support the Gay community and not the Heterosexual community? I don't think so.
It's just that I don't see it as a discrimination issue. I see it as an issue of professional specialization.
Just my two cents worth.
Regards, Fred[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please see the first part of my reply on the previous message. Substitute the word 'black' for the word 'gay'. Now you perhaps see where many GLBT activists are coming from.
And you are correct -- when the shoe is on the other foot, discrimin- ation is not a lot of fun. In Australia, where GLBT 'rights' are very strong, a couple of restaurant/tavern owners have specifically banned _heterosexual_ people from using their establishment. _Many_ (not all, but a substantial number of) LGBT Americans are making the comparison to the white/black struggles in America a half-century ago. I am not sure that is an accurate comparison, but it is a very common one these days. PAT]