So not that I'm defending women in provactive outfits performing (yeah, yeah, I know...), but why is it these same groups will line up to defend strippers and sex-workers as "empowered? If the cheerleaders were naked and people were throwing money at them, I guess that would be OK?
Makes no sense whatsoever.
Modern feminism is basically idiotic, so it's sometimes hard to follow their "logic." However, I think they'd differentiate on two grounds. First, though the stripper and prostitute both provide sexual pleasure (to various degrees) for dudes, they actually make a living doing it and sometimes make a pretty good living. I represented a few strippers. They weren't rich, but they made a hell of a lot more than your average high school grad. I have no idea what prostitutes make. It probably varies a lot. I've been told that in Amsterdam, if you're willing to fork out 50 Euros (about $65), you can get about 20 minutes of "action." Cheerleaders make very little - not anywhere near enough to make a living.
Second, the "sex-positive feminists" are going to be OK with prostitution, because the women are having sex, which means that they at least might get some enjoyment out of it. Do I think your average dude hooking up with a prostitute is actually concerned with her pleasure? No, but are some? Perhaps.
And of course, keep in mind that feminists generally like anything that bothers or offends religious people. Cheerleading doesn't offend most religious people. Striping does, and of course, prostitution really does.