I'm curious as to why you can't state this from the place of what you feel is right for you, rather than what's right for all women. I'd have no issue with "your opinion" if you said "I would only see a female therapist." You certainly aren't in any position to opine about what's best for me or any other woman. And as for the role of transference and vulnerability in psychotherapy, these issues being raised are not a problem as long as you have a skilled and ethical therapist. Trying to structure therapy to avoid these issues doesn't make sense, because these issues arise routinely around issues that aren't about sexuality. There is no need for artificial rules about gender that ultimately don't protect clients either-- because female T's have hit on female clients, male T's have hit on male clients, female T's have hit on male clients, etc, and none of this may have anything to do with sexual orientation. If boundary crossings do happen more often with male T's and female clients, it's because of the fact that there are more male T's with female clients than any other gender configuration in therapy.

I just don't believe there is anything inherently wrong with a female client having a male T. In my own life, I've had two fabulous male T's, and one fabulous female T. From the male T's, having a positive relationship with them has helped me see men as individual people, not just abusers and as the violent perpetrators of the world. They have also helped me move closer to the important men in my life, my husband and son. For me, connection with women has always been easy, natural. With men, it can be awkward and strained and hollow. It's been a good thing to do the extra work to connect to a man that's not part of my world.

Anne