In an interview, Valerie Steele, the Chief Curator of the Museum of Fashion at FIT, describes the word “fashion” as the “F-word.”  In the 70’s, fashion had negative connotations, and Steele fought a long, uphill battle to create Fashion Studies in a world that did not yet respect it.

Later, in the 90’s with the introduction of waif-like and fragile teenage model Kate Moss, the “F-word” has come to represent the stigma of “fat.”  Despite hopeful attempts by some of the most influential in modern media, “fat” retains its “F word” status when it applies to models in the fashion industry.

V magazine dedicated its #63 release to the “Size Issue.” Unfortunately, New York Magazine’s cover story, “Return of the Voluptuous,” seemed promising, but led readers only to a disappointing two-page spread.  And the subject, Christina Hendricks, is actually an actress, not a model at all.  The cover featuring Christina with her lustrous red hair cascading down one bare shoulder, her white eyelet corset and matching rompers, appeared more objectified than soldier for the cause.

“Because I am a plus-size model, they make me an example,” says Crystal Renn in a New York Times article The Triumph of the Size 12. “When designers and editors choose one fat girl to salivate over, and revel in her avoirdupois, I’m not sure how much it advances the cause of using girls in all sizes in a magazine.”

Just a month after the V Magazine Size Issue was released, dialogue was sparked during New York Fashion Week.  Last Tuesday a panel organized by the CFDA’s Health Initiate Committee was held in New York City.  The committee included fashion journalists, casting agents, fashion designers, fashion editors, showroom representatives, models and an eating disorder specialist.  The hope was to save prepubescent size-zero children, and those fighting anorexia or any other self-destructive behavior that combats their bodies’ natural ability to grow and develop.

One goal for the panel was to investigate “resizing the sample size.”  Consistently, designers create samples in only a size zero.  This forces models to achieve the size zero body type.  But the conversation quickly turned from the models’ sizes to the model’s ages.  It seems the two can never truly be separate issues.

Tonne Goodman, the stylist from Vogue, slyly explained her role in the micro-mini sample sizes, almost deflecting blame onto others in the industry.  “The designers, casting agents and stylist all precede me before the sample is in my hands… the size of the sample dictates the model I can put in it.”  One would think, though, that Vogue might have the power to persuade a designer to create a bigger sample.

In fact, if sample sizes are too small, it seems obvious that all of the panel members could strategize, collaborate and demand to change the sample size at its inception.  This change would thereby alter the shape of the model at the fashion shoot, on the runway, and then, finally, the size of the garment in our shops.

It also seems a bit ironic that these tiny samples sizes and the waif-like spindly models, portrayed parading around the runways and in the ubiquitous fashion  campaigns, are the opposite profile of the actual consumer demographic who can afford to shop and spend religiously and routinely on designer clothing and accessories. A 12 year old doesn’t have the income to buy a $7,000 jacket and $4,500 tote, so, why  does the fashion industry continue to promote and present their ideas through an identity that off the runway or photo shoot, does not resemble physically, emotionally or financially, the women who can actually afford to buy these items. The majority of the young models only get a glimpse into the high end designer filled closet and beautiful clothes for the duration of the shoot or runway show. After the last picture is taken or the model has walked her last look for a show, she immediately changes back into her Target jeans from the childrens’ section, an oversize white American Apparel t shirt, and her beat up old Chucks.

Zac Posen, always an advocate for women of all sizes, represented the fashion designers at the panel.  Along with Diane Von Furstenberg this season, Zac proudly cast the gorgeous supermodel Coco Rocha, a whopping size four.  Rocha was undeniably the most beautiful, sexy, and still incredibly thin, model to walk the runway.  At the CFDA panel, both she and Zac agreed that the sample size should be changed to a size four.

Recently, there was discussion in the news about plus sized models generally being a size twelve.  In reality, size fourteen is actually the average size of regular American women.  Adding insult to injury, only a few weeks later, a size four is argued to be too large for the runway.

“I am not in demand for shows anymore,” a frustrated Coco Rocha tells the New York Times.  At only a size four, she has been kicked out of castings, runway shows and print ads.  On her blog, she writes “I’m a 21 year old model, six inches taller and ten sizes smaller than the average American woman.  Yet in another parallel universe I’m considered fat.”

All of this begs the question, can’t we all unite, throw away our hypocrisy and merge the dichotomy of the real world and the fashion world into one?  Can’t we make Coco’s parallel universes meet at a crossroads?  Can’t we work collectively to change the sample size for the bigger, better and more accepting?  The answer is dependent upon every person involved in all aspects of the fashion cycle.  Without every one aboard for the same destination, our ship is stuck at port with a size zero.  That the discussion is happening makes me hopeful that we will pull anchor and embrace the sea’s full array of shapes and sizes.  Maybe this will help average American women utter with relief the F-word we’ve wanted to say to the fashion industry for years – “Finally!”