Chocolate Jesus exhibit cancelled

Here's the story as it appears on BBC.
But what really caught my eye was not that the Christian group was protesting against somebody making a chocolate sculpture of Jesus, but that they were protesting just as much about portraying Jesus naked:
Ms McCaffrey had called the exhibit "an assault on Christians".
"They would never dare do something similar with a chocolate statue of the Prophet Mohammed naked with his genitals exposed during Ramadan."

Firstly, with Islam it would be a whole different deal because *any* sort of portrayal of God or Mohammed is not allowed by Islamic law AFAIK.

Secondly (and this is what I really want to talk about), Christ most likely *was* naked on the cross. The whole idea of Christianity is that God made his own son suffer torture in a very humiliating way to clear humanity of its sins. And while generally the gospels do not specify whether they took his underwear off, all four gospels do specify his clothes were taken off.
The Wikipedia entry for Crucifixion actually says that the procedure usually involved nudity:
The victim was, if able, made to drag the cross or a part of it (usually weighing 150 lb or more) to the place of execution. At this point he was stripped naked, and was either fastened to it or impaled upon it, and left to die.
I'm not sure why there's this whole attempt of hiding the fact that Jesus might have been naked on the cross (surely it just adds to his humiliation and therefore to his sacrifice?), but the attempt goes much further than just not portraying him so in art...
If you look up John 19:23 on the Bible Gateway, you'll find that the New International Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Reader's Version, New International Version - UK and Today's New International Version all have some sort of wording indicating that only Christ's outer garments were taken off. None of the other versions (including two "new" ones) have any mention of whether it was just his outer garments and I don't think any of the other gospels have anything mentioned either (though I only checked the New International Version). I also checked out the Polish Biblia Tysiąclecia translation and again nothing specific mentioned. Some of those olds versions were really well researched (definitely the King James version for example), so can there be any other reason for these changes in the new versions?