Why the Fashion Industry Needs to Become More Accepting in 2016

Updated on 12/30/2015 at 6:01 AM

Looking back at 2015, it's easy to see the progress the fashion industry has made: transgender models have walked the runway, the term "plus size" is well on its way to extinction, and society as a whole has realized there's more than one way to define beauty. It's impressive, to say the least.

But no matter how you slice it, there's still a long way to go, especially in terms of having more body types and capabilities represented in media, ads, and fashion shows. You still need to be over a certain height to be a model. Women like Madeline Stuart are an exception, not the rule. And only one side of the curvy spectrum — the relatively small and toned side — can be spotted starring in major campaigns.

Shopping for clothing is another point of contention for many, especially if you aren't considered a traditional size. Why are there only a handful of stores that cater to extended and petite sizes? And even then, why must women — even women like Melissa McCarthy — be forced to shop in different sections of the store, rather than join their "regular" sized friends?

As a petite woman myself and someone who once had (albeit lofty) dreams of modeling, it's hard not to see this extremely large and excluding gap in the industry I love and work in. So what are some things that I hope change come 2016? Read on for my list. Fashion, I hope you're listening.

It's Time to Readjust the Requirements to Become a Model

While looking superthin is being phased out, there are still women being told they're "too fat" to model and height requirements — five feet, seven inches is considered short! — haven't budged at all. You could argue that models should look a certain way in order to display the clothing, but you can also argue that, hey, we all wear clothes. Shouldn't we see pieces displayed the way they'll actually be worn? Plus, if women with different body types were represented on retailer websites, it would probably be a lot easier for shoppers to imagine how clothing would look them, rather than making an educated guess about sizing and overall fit.

More Body Types Should Be Represented in Advertising

As previously stated, it would be nice to see a variety of women, of all shapes and sizes, being represented in advertising. Progress has been made with "real girl," "plus size," and unretouched campaigns, but women who star in these ads rarely represent the majority. Emma Roberts, for example, who appears in Aerie’s unedited ads, is thin and fit, frequently ‘gramming photos of herself doing Pilates. The top plus-size models — who star in major ads and can be spotted in big publications — are almost always in great shape as well, representing only one side of the curvy spectrum. Where are all the Tess Hollidays of the world or Denise Bidots, who unapologetically show off their cellulite for big brands? There should be a mixture of body types being seen, not just the toned and trim.

The Industry Should Be More Inclusive in General

While women who wear headscarves, women who have Down syndrome, and women who are wheelchair-bound all make up our diverse society, it's still rare to spot them in a major ad campaign. The same goes for transgender models — why are there only a handful walking the runway right now? — and women who prefer to rock their natural hair. Not having these women properly represented sends the message that they aren’t beautiful, which definitely is not the case. It's time for them to be part of the rule — not the exception.

Let's Stop the Comparisons

There are many, many different body types in this world, and one isn't better than the other. Lane Bryant's #ImNoAngel campaign meant well, but some found the undertones of that hashtag to be hurtful. Victoria's Secret models train hard for their bodies, and no, not all "real women have curves" — some are just naturally thin. Let's stop trying to fit beauty into a box and realize it comes in various forms, not just one.

Size Terms Should Be Dropped Completely

Why can't we just have waist and length measurements listed, much like it is with men's clothing? Why are petite and "plus-size" women forced into different sections of the store to shop? And can't we just refer to these body types as sizes, rather than give them special names? Retailers, get on this, and make the selections bigger while you're at it. It's unfair that we're only able to choose from a handful of styles when we want every piece, too.