I had this thought so long ago that I barely remember what all I wanted to say.  But this is meant to be the umbrella thread for both things like Showgirls to Night Shift to Risky Business and The Girl Next Door...   Mainstream stuff only, no links or illustrations, and keep it safe for work.  Mind your language!

The most glaring thing I can think of is that the tone is different depending on the gender of the main character.  If the MC is female, it's gonna be a drama (usually, Striptease had a sense of humour), and I don't want to say heavy handed but the feeling is dour, they usually try to overcompensate for the subject matter-- especially if they're trying to get a big name actress.

Somewhat conversely, if the MC is a guy, he'll be put into a position of power, and the fun, alluring glamour of it all will be emphasized (and yeah, violence and the like will come up-- as we see in "Risky Business" or "The Girl Next Door"), but the health risks and so on won't even be mentioned.

If it's an established actress, it's a safe bet that there's a clause in their contract that means we won't be seeing everything, which defies the reality of it, doesn't it?  Think Elisha Cuthbert in Girl Next Door.  I think the exception to the rule is Striptease and that involved a big payday (and let's be honest, a bit of a hospital bill) that didn't really pay back enough to make that sort of transaction a trend.

Meanwhile, any other girl in the movie could appear in any sort of starkers-- think every girl who was not Michelle Trachtenberg in Eurotrip, and, like GND, think about what was on the cover.  False advertising.  But I think that's more of a nitpick than anything else.

Of course, the intersection on the venn diagram of actresses who are talented, actresses who get starkers, and actresses who can get financing is miniscule at best, too...

And this isn't even getting into the whole arbitrary standards we saw in "This Film Is Not Yet Rated."

I like Heather too.  And you definitely need to be fearless to be an actor anyway, take risks, but there is a sort of double standard where a female actress is expected to be in skimpy little swimsuits or n u d e at some point (a friend sent me to a tumblr that names actresses who are in commercials and many of the shots are sexy) and with men it's a lot less expected, so actresses once they start going up the totem pole start to protect themselves in legalese.

Halle Berry is another actress that was "guarded" early in her career, but suddenly doesn't have a problem dropping the robe. Me think it has more to do with the fact that she is "aging" by Hollywood standards. And neither role really was a part that justified it in a way to move the story forward. It was simply to get a T&A shot in there to bolster a sliding career at the time. As soon as their career gets a revival if you will....the robes come back to stay on.

Do you think there is a tipping point for actors. How many have made a comeback? A handful. As much as I loves to look at Halle Berry, I think her boat has gone over Niagra. Especially with the point your making about getting labeled with T&A and the acting becomes secondary in the studio and audiences eyes.

I don't think they can really "recover" unless you happen to luck out and get a franchise role like she did with Storm in the X-Men films. She knows that she's got this locked up for the series (at the time) and potentially a few more after the fact which gives her leverage. But if she and any other actor/actress were bouncing from movie to movie, said leverage is gone and that's when you start to see them disrobing on a more consistent basis. She's kind of in the rare situation right now. But give her a few bombs along the way, you will see more of her.