on 7/22/05 5:38 PM, David W. Fenton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 22 Jul 2005 at 16:27, Don Hart wrote: > >> on 7/22/05 2:17 PM, David W. Fenton at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> And I definitely believe that the "no female tenors" rule is more >>> justifiable than the "no countertenors singing alto" rule. The >>> former is, at least, historically appropriate. >> >> So we can sexually discriminate based on a history determined by >> sexual discrimination?
> Er, it isn't sex discrimination. What isn't: Catholicism's ban on females singing within it's walls or the "no female tenors" rule? >> That might not hold up in a court of law. ;-) > > Only a court with a really stupid judge who couldn't tell the > difference between valid qualifications for musical tasks and brain- > dead stupid fantasies about equality. David, I just thought it was ironic you would more readily support a limitation on female singers because of a history that started out limiting female singers. DH _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
