Although I understand the reasons behind the decision to purposefully cover up "down there" for regular clothing shows, I've posted in the Supermodel/Runway thread that I think it's hypocritical at a lingerie show to have skin-toned panties on underneath since one of the main reasons for a see-thru garment is to be able to actually see through it. Lingerie shows should expect their models to demonstrate the effects/effectiveness of the product.
To expound upon my statements in the other thread, I suppose one could make the argument that just seeing the skin-toned panties underneath actually does demonstrate the effects/effectiveness of the garment without showing the private lady parts but it really comes down to whether or not the product is accurately portraying its purpose. The play "To Kill A Mocking Bird" could communicate it's message without using the "N" word but there are those in the theater community that insist on leaving the original language intact because they don't want to inaccurately portray the author's message or product. Isn't clothing a type of art form too? What's the difference between a model posing completely naked for a photo shoot (or painting sitting) and being completely naked underneath lingerie at a fashion show? I don't think there's a difference personally. Actually, maybe I just don't want there to be a difference because I really would love to see these kinds of pictures.
Oh well.
I haven't been able to find much either.