I am concerned about the sex-negative tone of both this column and many of the comments. We live in a society where sexual options are expanding and where sexual information is easier to obtain. Yet many attitudes remain stuck in the Victorian era.

Ms Clark-Flory's column strongly implies that mixing up sex and money is bad, bad, bad! Others will tell us that sex with non-married partners, with whips or restraints, with multiple people, with voyeurs present, with costumes, with casual partners, with same sex partners... are all varying degrees of bad, bad, bad!

I've got news for you. Consenting adults are doing all of the above, safely, and with no measurable harm to anyone, except insofar as the right-wingers and most of the media are telling them that they should feel badly about themselves for having so much fun. In many cases people are fearful that they will be "outed" and may lose friends, contact with family, or even their jobs as a result of these sex-negative attitudes.

This column furthers the myth that people who experiment with sex should feel bad about themselves. It also furthers the marginalization of sexworkers and so isn't doing them any favors. Truly, it is not helping anyone.

Hyblaean, I don't know any from personal experience; in fact, I don't have any experience with strippers and strip clubs (nothing against them, I'm just rather shy). But look at webcat above, whose first fiancée was a stripper to get money for her biochemistry doctorate and who now works for NASA -- I suspect she's not in the lower economic classes. He also mentions strippers with doctorates in astrophysics, and elementary school teachers. For those going to college, I suppose it's like being a waitress: perhaps for the time being they don't have that much money, but they're investing.

Another possible source of well-off strippers: check some of the more successful porn stars, who also sometimes dance. Some of them are quite rich, and they continue stripping and dancing for their fans instead of retiring. (Yes, I'm not against pornography; in fact, I quite support it. Hope that doesn't destroy my image :-).

"I'd much more see a problem of economical classes (for the strippers who are poor and had no other choice than stripping to earn a living) than of gender inequality."

Are there any rich strippers? Does that happen?

Thank you very much for your post on the other thread- still digesting it :)

Definitely for... I think that folks are conflating behavior in one-night-stands, for instance, with behavior in committed relationships. A little objectifying is fine; just have some hot sex with someone you think is hot and that you love. Everything should be seen in context.

I don't think I understand your point. Is it simply that anything goes between consenting adults? And are you for or against?

This is the confusion that's generated by a society that is so overly sexualized. Where sex is found whereever you look.

Anything that a husband and wife do that is mutually acceptable is OK. That includes (what a wonderful thing) lusting after one another. Are you an object of someone's lust? Sure. That can be OK. Why not?

Let me agree with webcat and Flora Poste on that -- I don't really see any reason for thinking that pole dancing is inherently demeaning to women or men, nor do I think that female strippers are necessarily oppressed women -- not any more than male strippers, or than female waitresses, for that matter. Here, as far as oppression is concerned, I'd much more see a problem of economical classes (for the strippers who are poor and had no other choice than stripping to earn a living) than of gender inequality.

Thank you webcat for your belly dancing comparison; I was thinking the same thing. I think partners stripping for each other is an excellent form of foreplay, and if you can dance well all the better. A pole is a prop that can add to the dance and I think it is ridiculous to suggest that it's presence demeans the woman. Just because a man is turned on does not mean he is turned on because he is looking at his wife as a whore. If it turns you on and you both have fun with it then do it. To suggest there is something wrong or whorish with that is flat out ridiculous.

Ever been to a decent strip club? No? Then don't pretend to know who goes there and what type of people work there.

My 1st fiance danced her way through college all the way to her doctorate in BioChem and now works for NASA. Through her I met other dancers who were doctoral candidates in astrophysics even local elementary school teachers. Strippers are not by definition whores. They're hard working gals offering a service of entertainment and comfort to men.

Who are the clientele? Lonely guys or groups of men out to have a fun night out with the guys. Most strip clubs are pretty tightly run affairs and inappropriate behavior gets on stern warning and then a violent toss out the door. In the vast majority of clubs women have a lot more clear power than your standard waitressing job.

As for mundane folks trying out pole dancing what's the big deal? Nobody freaked out when every woman on the block had to learn belly dancing which for all intents and purposes is the same type of entertainment. It is an awesome work out, fun for everyone and it's a fad that will pass.

But Tracy did not say she was torn between condemnation of professional pole dancing (the war) and empathy for the needs of its practitioners (the troops.) She said she was torn about classes in erotic dancing for women seeking exercise and recreation (the civilians.) That means she finds one or more troubling factors, and one or more appealing factors.

So, for your props in reading comprehension, I ask again: Why is Tracy "torn" about these classes? Her empathy for professional erotic workers is immaterial. What troubles her, and what appeals to her, about these classes?

Linney proposed an answer, which you derided. You've proposed none.