Feminist thinking is divided on the question of sex employment, Molecule. There are plenty of voices from many perspectives, and the discussion is by no means settled. Accordingly, you're simply wrong to have made the blanket statement that "strippers aren't powerful."
Sorry, I didn't realize it was necessary to say, "While there are many contesting opinions on this issue, mine is that--" before I stated my opinion on a contested issue. My bad. But yeah, I guess I did come off a bit strong, sorry about that.
Things that bother me about the idea that sex=power:
1. Historically it hardly ever works. When was the last time that female sexuality resulted in anything but opression for women on any sort of large scale?
2. It's fundamentally sexist, as it implies that men will do anything for sex. Or conversely, that women are sluts who will give up purity for what they want.
3. It's hardly ever indicative of a heathly understanding of sex. In Spider Robinson's (science fiction) book
Callahan'sLady, about the one honorably run brothel in New York City, the whole point is that sex is seen as something two adults do for fun, and nothing more. The main character, a young prostitute used to using sex as a tool, (& thus, she thinks, a source of power) has to be re-educated in what sex means before she can really get anywhere in life. Yes, it's fiction, but I think it makes a good point.
Also, strippers provide a service. Do we really think of other service providers, like waiters and taxi drivers, being more powerful than the people they provide the service for? People who have disposable income to spend on luxury services, while the service providers usually barelymade enough to scrape by on?
Okay, the reason I stated my opinion so strongly in my initial response is that to say "sex workers can be powerful," while theoretically correct, ignores the massive, widespread exploitation and abuse of women in sex worker positions. Any women working as a stripper in a bar frequented only by "drooling idiots" is likely to be exploited. Overly sexualised women in video games are definately exploited, or rather feminine sexuality is being exploited, because these women aren't real. I'm not even saying sex employment is by definition is a bad thing. I'm saying that the way it's implemented now, with the workers being construed as dirty harlots and the patrons being construed as drooling idiots, with the idea of a women's power to idiot-ify a man and a man's power to objectify a women maintaining center stage, it's no real way to give power to women. It's no real way to be.
..okay, that was in reply to Lord J. And Kanadyets typed up a whole thing while I was wrestling with this... here goes:
Sorry about the sweepingness of my generalizations. I meant to imply that exploitation was the norm, not that it occured in every instance. And yes, you did posit an example. In debating circles we call that a rhetorical question. The answer isn't given, but it's bloody well implied.
Of course people should be held accountable for their decisions. Here, it's you who seem to be assuming that I beleive sex workers to be "selling their proverbial souls." Never have I said anything to imply that stripping or other forms of sex work are inherently wrong. The only bad decision the sex workerwould be making is staying in a bad situation. And maybe it's the only way for them to get money they know, so it's not so much a decisions. That's where the exploitation and abuse tend to come in.