I will answer this for my husband. The answer is yes, and we don't tell our children about them. The problem is that Danny would be so outraged that he'd tell everyone in the neighborhood, thus damaging my children while pretending to be so holy.
Would the world be a better place if NO ONE ever did anything that isn't acceptable for children to see? (We'll excuse marital sex here). Sure! But it would be the elimination of the murders, rapes, and drugs that would be the major factor. Stopping a bunch of middle aged women from walking into a Chippendales would probably have very little effect.
In this world where children are ignored by working parents, shuttled between divorces and mom and daddy's new shack ups, exposed to alcoholism and drug abuse, you're concerned about the effect of teachers going to Chippendales. Seems silly to me.
In this world where...
...men & women look to titillation elsewhere beyond finding a partner or investing in the partner they already have;
...where folks escape into internet porn & engorge themselves on 4-7 hrs. a day of escapist, risque TV & movies;
...where some folks are introduced to eventual sex addictions by the risque "adult entertainment industry" (which includes Chippendale's, no matter how tame, funny, or burlesque-like folks want to present it)...after all, burlesque has been around for a long time dating back to wild-west days and it's always been linked to the prostitution industry;
...where we already have few role models of whole people of integrity (unlike previous generations, I might add) and the remaining few continue to opt out of wanting to present themselves as wholesome role models for the next generation;
...where wives can't compete w/airbrushed porn models & shameless acts other women are only too quick to perform before the camera, nor w/the smoky images & cheap thrills presented in strip & lap-dance bars;
...where husbands aren't Chippendale hunks who add only one further reminder to wives as to why their husbands don't measure up to a wife's ever elusive expectations;
...where educators over the past few years have made headlines for earning extra income as prostitutes or going to swing clubs in Florida or (many) having sex changes or (many more) having sex w/students, there comes a point when the headlines have been amassed enough that it tends to present a corporate reputation of a profession that is no longer flattering;
...your lack of concern over these educators' endorsement of the adult entertainment industry seems to confirm that the conscience which once made us sensitive to these things has been seared and disengaged. And such an endorsement it is. Any business we do business with is an investment in that business.
If I pay $ to a babysitter who I know is turning around & taking that very $ down the street to the Crack House then I'm investing in her known drug habit. Likewise, these educators not only invested in the adult entertainment industry, they've given a rousing endorsement of it that every kid in that school now knows.(They might as well have done a Chippendale's commercial)
This has the same effect as educators showing R-rated, expletives-not-deleted movies in the classroom (which other educators repeatedly do) and then looking foolish when these same educators try to crack down on students who then use the same exact words in the classroom. Once you sanction such words as fair game for class instruction, then a teacher has surrendered the moral high ground for cracking down on similar verbiage bantered about in the classroom.
Likewise, a sex-ed teacher at this very school can't maintain a double standard. She can't pretend that it's okay for females to be catered to by the adult entertainment industry and that males are to live by a different standard. And the adult entertainment industry has not accumulated a corporate reputation for promoting spousal faithfulness or of lowering the STD rate, etc.
Therefore any endorsement this educator makes of an industry that actually serves to (at least indirectly) increase the STD rate is irresponsible.
The bottom line: The one verse Paul repeats in 1 Cor. is "Everything is permissible" (for the Christian)--in other words, we don't live legalistic lives. The moral code is not the main driver of our ethical behavior (the relationship with Christ is). Paul, though, adds a "but" to his "everything is permissible." "But not everything is beneficial." "Everything is permissable," he then says yet again, "but not everything is constructive." (1 Cor. 10:23).
Was it permissible for these educators to go to Chippendales? Many have already made the argument here that the answer to that is "yes." Was it beneficial? I say, "no." Was it constructive? I say, "no" & especially was not constructive in the lives of the children these educators have just educated them on re: what's a proper approach to the adult entertainment industry? Lives are too short to go around doing unbeneficial, non-constructive things.