Note: I haven't read the book in question, nor do I know the author or the reviewer AT ALL. These are just general thoughts about the discussion here and here.
A plot that involves a female cop going undercover as a stripper to discover her sexuality is not original or innovative, not one little bit. Am I the only person who thinks this is a huge cliche, inside and outside of romance? Telling me something that stupid just makes me think that you are stupid, or at least not very widely read.
Just because you're married to someone who happens to do something for a living doesn't mean you know anything more than the basics about it, no matter how proud you are of them or how much you identify with them or with what they do. Do you think my husband knows enough about how a library works to write it convincingly? NO. Do I know enough about how railroad companies work to write them convincingly? NO. My husband and I and his best friend were all in the Army together. Despite being surrounded all the time by three people who were all active-duty Army intelligence personnel for a number of years, how often do you think I get irritated by the way our friends sometimes misrepresent or misunderstand the things that we did? Frequently. Basically, having a connection to something ON ITS OWN does not mean you can write it well. That's why authors/writers should indulge in a little something called research.
The tsk, tsk attitude that people get (authors and readers) when they see an opinion that they don't like is really annoying. Luckily, I don't review books here that frequently (and this gives me one more reason not to), so I don't have to deal with it. But I get tired of seeing discussion about books hijacked by people who want to be everybody's mother or their priest. I've got both, thanks, and I'm sure most of the reviewers have one/both themselves.