You know, Anthony, I really do not appreciate having my personal sexuality attacked on these pages. You first write:

(No, kerwynk, I am not and have NEVER accused you of being a sexual fascist or even being a sexual conservative; I'm simply making a point that many of your points do, in my view, quite a bit in justifying sexual conservatism under a label of "labor protectionism" and distorting ses-positive radicalism under the label of "individualism" and "libertariansim".)

That would have been fine, if a few paragraphs earlier you hadn't have written:

will they be basically shut out of your ideal labor organization merely because they might have a more expansive view of sexuality than you do???  

and 

I ask you again, kerwynk: is your motive really based on protecting worker rights in general; or is it really to impose your personal ideas of sexual restriction?? 

 My personal ideas of sexual restriction have never been part of this discussion, until you brought it up; I've been discussing how we might address sex workers' views on work restrictions within a strip club. And as for my "non-expansive" view of sexuality, what would you know of it? 

I've tried to keep this friendly and to inject humor, but I'm unwilling to keep dialoging with someone who insults me at a personal level. So, despite the fact that you raise some interesting substantive points, I'm out. I think I've expressed my opinion on this matter more than sufficiently in any case.

 *******

 Also, just a clarification for others, Anthony writes:

(I am for decriminalization and legalization of sex work; and I would assume that kerwynk does also; but with using such rhetoric as calling lap dances and mere body contact "prostitution"; it certainly begs to wonder.)

  Anthony mistakes my reference. I am indeed talking about handjobs and blowjobs and intercourse within the strip clubs.