This particular thread is mystifying to me and it has been going on for about five days. I obviously need help in understanding the mindsets of the posters with some exceptions poster-wise,
The original post was:
A old man was praying to God to show him people better than him and God showed him a woman dancing for men to fed her children since other job was not available.
But this is not the point. The point is how and when did the dancer become a stripper in this thread (or pole dancer, lap dancer, choose your own hyperbole). To dance is an intrinsic part of humanity and more often than not geared to the opposite sex. It is an expressive art form and a language that allows us to relate who we are and what we are feeling. It is an expression of us and not the commercial advertisement for sex the former innuendo connotes.
In any case I just wanted to state that I found some of the posts in this thread sickening.
I apologize if someone else has already responded adequately to this, but I wanted to comment on how a “woman dancing for men” became a stripper or equivalent in this thread. I think the insinuation is made from the fact that the woman was a dancer for men
specifically, as opposed to a woman who just generally “danced” or “danced before crowds” to feed her children. What kind of dancing would a woman do solely “for men” that would not be of an immoral and seductive quality? If this dancing is not of an immoral and seductive quality, why would she be a dancer “for men” only, and not for general audiences, crowds, families, both men and women, etc.? While the point may be taken that even a stripper or otherwise seductive (but clothed) dancer, who by her profession draws men to perdition but who does so reluctantly and with regret out of necessity, may be “better” in the sight of God than any man or woman who is full of pride; nevertheless, I still doubt the patrimony of this text on the basis of the fact that it seemingly justifies such immoral and seductive dancing which inflames the passions of men and leads them to perdition. In the stories which have come down to us among the Sayings of the Fathers, we learn of monks who have similarly wondered whether anyone alive surpassed them in perfection. In response to this kind of thought, such monks are usually told of a certain man or couple in the world who surpasses the monk in perfection. In such cases, the “more perfect” layman or lay couple are indeed very virtuous and are considered “more perfect” before God because while they also lived virtuously and chastely (as did the monk), they also considered themselves more sinful than everyone else. While the monk tempted by pride wondered if anyone is greater than himself, the “more perfect” laity live uprightly in the world and
are convinced that no one is worse than themselves. In stories from the Fathers which refer to women who were involved in scandalous professions (usually prostitution), they are praised only after departing from such sinful occupations, giving their sinfully-gained incomes to the poor, washing away the filth of their sins in the waters of baptism, and passing the rest of their days in the most extreme forms of asceticism, shedding many tears and undertaking many labors to destroy the passions which formerly enslaved them. The Lord said that prostitutes were entering into the kingdom of heaven before the Pharisees precisely because of the humble and complete repentance of the former in contrast to pride and hypocrisy of the latter. The Lord told the woman caught in adultery to “go and sin no more”. We have no such stories which justify such sinful occupations, as far as I have read.
In general, I do not think we should discuss such questionable stories from unnamed monks that are at odds with the countless stories from the Fathers which we have on record. Furthermore, if such an incident did occur wherein a woman could find no respectable occupation to provide for her family, do you really think God would bless her for choosing an occupation which would lead her soul, and the souls of her male clients, to perdition? If such an occupation was the only occupation available to the woman, would not God greatly bless her and her children, either in this life or in the life to come, for refusing this occupation despite the material and bodily needs of her family? What good is food, clothing, and shelter, if you lose your soul and help others to forfeit their souls in order to obtain them?