It is certainly within a line of the progress of folk dance.
According to Thomas Hardy none our present dances are 'folk'. He says "These 'Country Dances' were not the same as 'folk-dances', though usually considered to be. They superceded and extinguished the latter from a hundred to a hundred and fifty years ago, as being more 'genteel', though sometimes the folk-dances were done within my memory, the motions being more boisterous than in the Country dance, a distinguishing mark of them being the crossing of one leg over the knee of the other, and putting the hands on the hips."
I agree about the horrid shoes which seem to distort the dancing.
But it has stepping and figures. Regency dance was all about showing off your athleticism and accomplishments.
As for the underpants - we went to a Modern American Square dance club for a time. Interesting, but a lot of the emphasis seemed to be on costume and 'skirt work'. The women wore full skirts, many layered petticoats, and 'modesty drawers' and the aim of some seemed to be to display them as many times as possible. Worse still they didn't dance in time to the music.