>In two messages, edited for length and my specific reponses, Richard
>Tabnik wrote
>
>SNIP
>> >
>> >It's the kind of wives tail that is repreated endlessly until people
>> >believe it's a fact.
>>
>> ...Besides being an ugly sexist cliche, this totally discounts the
>> experience of many people who studied with LT and Connie, et. al. Again,
>> your refused to check out the records I mentioned. But i suspect that you
>> are so close minded, that it wouldn't make any difference.
>>
>Whether or not its an "ugly sexist cliche" is irrelevant to this
>discussion.
...Perhaps, but I just couldn't let it go by. It might not seem irrelevant
to you if you or someone you love were the one insulted. Awareness is
always good, and, while I didn't wish to get into a discussion about it, I
just felt it mattered. If it had been a racist cliche, would you have let
it go by?
>Demanding we consult your records seems to me a bit odd; We
>have to go find and buy these, just to check a method of transcription
>that some have advocated, but that clearly is not the only method.
...You don't have to buy them! Check out my 'radio page' for a listing of
stations that have my cd's. My cd's are also in the NYC public library and
at Rutgers