I Worked In A Gentlemen’s Club. Here’s The Uncomfortable Truth Many Married Women Won’t Face.
EDITORIAL:
This article is provided to balance our perspective, show how the other side thinks, and why it is doomed to fail. Here are the biblical problems with this woman’s approach:
- She slanders marriage as if it were a form of “sex work”. God says it’s honorable. Heb. 13:4.
- She promotes foolishness. Prov. 14:1 says the foolish woman tears down her own household. The family as God designed it IS that household and she belittles it as if its just a form of “sex work” or economic equalization.
- She appears to want to use sex as a way to subvert God’s design for the relationship between male and female. Sex in a biblical sense should never be abused to invert the biblical hierarchy of authority. Gen 3:16 describes the curse upon Eve and all women following her that her desire will be for her husband. This woman FLAUNTS and subverts that curse and the subversion of the family hierarchy by promoting the abuse of secular power and law to compel equality instead of the Godly hierarchy. This also subverts Eph. 5 hierarchy of the family.
- The desire to abuse sex for a malicious purpose is a sign of pride. The fact that she advertises and glorifies her immorality with pictures a bragging in the end about how to use her expertise to turn God’s law order for the family upside down is proof of that.
- She admits she is a single mother, probably BECAUSE of the pride and malice she appears to have toward men. What man would want to marry a woman who publicly makes fun of ALL men?
- She appears to admit being a harlot, which is probably how she BECAME a single mother to begin with. In that sense, she is just like the harlot in Rev. 18:7 who said: “‘I sit as queen, and am no widow, and will not see sorrow.’” In other words, she killed her husband, God, mentioned in Isaiah 54:5 and pretends he doesn’t exist so that she is “no widow”.
- She mistakes “truth” for “opinion”. Truth and evidence are synonymous. Opinions are not evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence. What she calls an “uncomfortable truth” isn’t truth as much as it is a foolish perspective and opinion on the world and personal agenda that wiser women, and especially married women made wiser by marriage, would be embarrassed to admit or have.
- She admits obtusely that as a former stripper with a PhD no less, she obtusely admits and defends the morality of STILL posting on Onlyfans (a porn site, as what she calls “an educator”) and thus tempting the men she describes as despicable to abandon their wives. So she obviously hates families.
- Prov. 5 describes all the characteristics of an immoral woman like the one who writes the article and it is spot on.
Nature and natural selection itself also dictate God’s family design and hierarchy that she criticizes. A two headed snake cannot survive the stresses of nature with two fighting heads any more than a family can without a leader and a follower. Even if she doesn’t believe in God, which she clearly doesn’t, the laws of nature shout loudly against her.
If this woman served in Congress, she would probably try to enact legislation to repeal the laws of gravity! Just like the current Congress thinks it can deficit spend indefinitely without negative consequence. The above kind of foolishness is what you get when you put the left in charge of secular politics.
Later in life, as an unmarried person, she is more likely to threaten the fiscal stability of the state by her rebellious spirit. Without a partner or husband to help her when she gets older, she will inevitably fall on dole of the state as what the courts call “a public charge” to get the help she needs. That will bring God’s curse in Deut 18:43-51. If she teaches the same rebellious and anti-social attitude to her female child, that child also will be less likely to get married, thus further shrinking the audience of people other than the government who could help her in old age.
The Way of Folly
13 A foolish woman is [b]clamorous;
She is simple, and knows nothing.
14 For she sits at the door of her house,
On a seat by the highest places of the city,
15 To call to those who pass by,
Who go straight on their way:
16 “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here”;
And as for him who lacks understanding, she says to him,
17 “Stolen water is sweet,
And bread eaten in secret is pleasant.”
18 But he does not know that the dead are there,
That her guests are in the depths of hell.[Prov. 9:13-18; Bible, NKJV; SOURCE: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%209&version=NKJV]
“Whoever brings ruin on their family will inherit only wind, and the fool will be servant to the wise.”
[Proverbs 11:29, Bible; This broadens the principle to anyone who destabilizes their household]“A wife of noble character is her husband’s crown, but a disgraceful wife is like decay in his bones.”
[Prov. 12:4, Bible; Again, wisdom versus folly in the household context]
Proverbs 31:10–31: The “virtuous woman” passage contrasts with Proverbs 14:1, showing how wisdom, diligence, and fear of the Lord build up a household.
Even if she did get married, she would be a horrible partner, because she isn’t content to accept the way things the way God designed them. She doesn’t have the main ingredient of happiness: Contentment. Worst yet, she appears PROUD of that fact. God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble. James 4:6, 1 Peter 5:5. Thus, she wants to play God by reengineering society around her preferences. Deut. 28:43-51 promises a CURSE upon all those who are not thankful or contented with what God gave them. These people propose to petition GOVERNMENT to give it to “grant” and therefore “loan” it to them with legal strings attached so that they become net debtors and slaves with no real private property.
This woman is obviously educated and has a PhD, so we wouldn’t call her stupid. At the same time, she is as foolish as they come based on the idiotic words out of her own mouth. Real love covers sin. Her approach is to expose it. She uses sin as a method to expose and blackmail others to get what she wants. Does she love you or society based on her own fruits? God, after all, is love. Education is supposed to produce humility about how little most people really know. In her, it has produced the opposite: pride and being more manipulative, narcissistic, and selfish.
By no means do we intend to single out women for criticism here. Men have their own share of problems. The corruption introduced into society documented on this website was created mostly by men in government. The sins they commit have a much broader effect on all of society than the single family and personal sins mentioned here inflicted by women.
We also believe that anytime you insert a 3rd party (THE STATE) into a sacred Covenant between 2 people, it is doomed to fail unless they both come to realize how this STATE interloper was inserted to replace God in that Covenant with STATE. If this woman gets married, she would have to marry a woman because no man in his right mind would put up with her malignant attitude. In that capacity, a state interloper would be mandatory to protect the sin she would inflict on society. That would needlessly grow the government. A government that protects sin is not only NOT a “government” in a biblical sense, but an ANTI-Government.
Have you noticed how Adolescent adult entertainment is where this woman comes from? That’s what happens when you let the LITTLE head do the thinking for the BIG head: Satan and stupidity are put in charge. This woman confirms this by saying that people in the strip clubs she frequented as a performer check their morality and discretion in at the door and keep everything under wraps.
The Republican plot to embarrass the liberals called “Operation Just Let Them Speak” is alive and well. Its better to close your mouth and be thought a fool than to open it and remove ALL doubt.
More about the God’s design and biblical hierarchy at:
- A Family Under God, Form #17.001
https://sedm.org/Forms/17-Theology/AFamilyUnderGod.pdf - Family Constitution, Form #13.003
http://famguardian.org/Publications/FamilyConst/FamilyConst.htm
BEGIN ARTICLE:
Buzzfeed, 12/15/25
When I first applied for a job in the adult entertainment industry, I was two states and hundreds of miles away from my hometown. As I sat there, waiting to be interviewed, one of my sister’s childhood athletic coaches walked in. Once hired, seeing men I recognized from outside the club as customers was not uncommon. From fellow university students to the owner of the restaurant where I also worked as a server, I had discovered a secret male world.
Even though women were the foundation of the entertainment, everyone in charge ― of the music, the drinks, the doors, the schedule, the money ― was a man. The women danced or cleaned and waited tables. The door to the women’s dressing room was either missing or left open, and if customers angled themselves opportunistically, they could see into the only bathroom stall, which never had a door.
Even though men were in charge, without women, there would be no money coming in the doors. However, the men treated women as expendable. If they fired someone, it didn’t matter. More than once I walked out. I remember a manager yelling, “You’ll be back!”
It was good money. Working in a restaurant in the late nineties, it was a good night when I surpassed $5 an hour. In the early 2000s, in a bigger city, I could make $14 an hour between tips and my $2.13 hourly rate. Waiting tables in the clubs, I routinely made $25 an hour between tips and an hourly rate of more than $5. Some dancers regularly made hundreds of dollars a night, even after payout to the house.
I learned many things working in the industry, including discretion. Like fight club, I learned to not talk about strip clubs outside of the club. It was something I needed to keep quiet about if I wanted to be seen as legitimate in the other spaces I was in. These were separate worlds. Once, when a man entered the club, a dancer who was a parent hid and begged to leave early because she recognized him as her child’s principal.
Fifteen years later, after I caught my fiancé cheating, I found solace in communities of betrayed women. These groups had little tolerance for sex workers. It was as though because of their jobs — because they were sex workers — they could not be betrayed the way other women could be betrayed. Many wives blamed sex workers more than their husbands for infidelity.
Negotiating these two identities — that of a betrayed partner and also that of someone who had worked in the adult entertainment industry — was tough. I could ignore my experiences working in so-called gentlemen’s clubs and receive support, or I could out myself and speak up for sex workers and be attacked as unworthy. I blocked many people during this time. I couldn’t help but think about how to bridge this gap.
As a sociologist, it is easy to argue that marriage is the ultimate form of sex work. A general rule of marriage in heteronormative patriarchal society is that men are the breadwinners and women provide sex. If men don’t uphold their end of this ideal, they are penalized, both with separation and less sex. Until the 1970s, nonconsensual sex in marriage was considered legal. Since then, many states have made spousal rape illegal, although loopholes still exist. And non-consummation of a marriage can be grounds for annulment, even in California. Of course, sexless marriages exist, and sex inside of marriage doesn’t have to be work.
And still, there have long been differential and gendered associations with sex. For example, virginity before marriage is seen as a benefit for women but a stigma for men. Pornography geared toward men captures a significant share of the internet and online searches. One popular site gets 100 million viewers a day. Boys use apps to generate fake and naked images of their classmates. Meanwhile, we criminalize and shame adult sex workers.
These hierarchies of sex work privilege one group of women over the other. The sex work that married women do is seen as legitimate and sacred. Marriage is highly sought after; weddings are a billion-dollar industry, and expected to grow. There are auxiliary benefits to a marriage, including financial benefits, housing and alimony.
Conversely, the work that sex workers do, also for exchange, is devalued and seen as problematic, profane and rendered outside of polite society. Further, the exchange rate for this less socially acceptable form of sex work can be difficult to negotiate. Men typically have the money and power, and sex workers can lack legitimate means to ensure payment; they risk punishment, danger and sometimes death.
If we recognize the commonalities between marriage and traditional sex work, we can see that when these two groups are pitted against each other, women’s work is undervalued and men, as a category, benefit. Women may fear that their partners will have more opportunities to betray — to break up their homes — if sex work is decriminalized. However, men, including married men, have access to sex while adult women are criminalized for supplying it.
The American Civil Liberties Union has long worked to decriminalize sex work. In 2022, California passed the Safer Streets for All Act, which decriminalized sex work-related loitering. However, we can go further. We can, as a society, fully embrace the idea that consensual sex among adults is always legal and up for negotiation in a free market.
Both married women and sex workers are safer and have more freedom when sex work is decriminalized. For example, if sex work is decriminalized, there can be more transparency about who is paying for sex. During my time working in the industry, billing went through a generic merchant company; the women at home did not see the often-crass names of the clubs that look better in neon than on a bank statement. When we decriminalize sex work, the billion-dollar sex traffic industry will be reduced.
Now, as a single mom and only parent, I wish it were easier for women to thrive without a dual income. Women’s work is largely underpaid. The median income for women is still only 83% of that of men. And, 40% of births are to unmarried women. Eighty percent of single parent households have a woman as head of the household. And the poverty rate for these families is high. I understand why some educators choose to subsidize their income with OnlyFans.
It is time we remove the benefits men receive when some sex workers are pushed under the rug. The majority of women support abortion rights. And women are rallying to promote the expectation that we — and not the majority-male government — are the rightful decision-makers when it comes to our bodies.
We should also be able to choose what job we do with our bodies. If we can exchange our labor for all sorts of terrible and dangerous, mind-numbing work, we should be able to exchange sex work for profit. When we marginalize sex workers as not worthy of naming their price, we endorse a sexist status quo that allows men privilege at our collective expense.
The double standards need to be eliminated. To do so, let’s do what we can, including voting, to decriminalize all forms of sex work. If we don’t act soon, bots will be recognized as legitimate sex workers before we are.
RAINN, the nation’s largest anti-sexual violence organization, has a 24/7 hotline at 800.656.HOPE (4673) and a chatline at online.rainn.org.
Megan Thiele Strong (she/they) is a professor in the Department of Sociology and Interdisciplinary Social Sciences at San José State University in California and a Public Voices Fellow at TheOpEdProject. She holds a doctorate and has 20 years of experience teaching a breadth of courses, including environmental sociology. She researches at the intersections of social and environmental justice, mental health and education.