Size inclusivity in menswear was already nearing non-existent. But somehow, for Fall/Winter 2026, it has declined again.
After a sharp drop for SS26, this season’s data confirms that the retreat is not a one-off, but part of a sustained rollback. Vogue Business assessed the 55 FW26 menswear shows and presentations published on Vogue Runway, and contacted each brand to verify the findings (brands were given 48 hours to respond). Out of 2,523 looks across Milan and Paris, only 0.2% were shown on plus-size models, down from 0.3% last season. Mid-size looks shrank from 1.2% to 0.8% (and 4.8% the season prior), while straight-size looks increased from 98.5% last season to 99% this season.
Size diversity on the runways dropped further this season, with no plus or mid-size models at the shows in Milan and very few in Paris.
“I was quite surprised to see models in Paris looking very skinny again, and disappointed that some designers did not include larger men in their casting,” says fashion critic Philippe Pourhashemi. “Some shows featured older men — which was nice — but they were also on the thin side. Fashion needs to start including a variety of bodies if it wants to stay relevant, and I think it also shows how disconnected some brands are from their real consumers, who are often not sample size.”
“It felt dire, completely unprogressive and in some shows even backwards with how painfully thin some models were,” says Hetty Mahlich, editor of SHOWstudio. “The most diverse body shapes we got were at Willy Chavarria and LGN, but even then it’s still a very aspirational, safe image of the male body which says volumes about where menswear is right now.”
Industry observers say this reflects a broader abandonment of the short-lived diversity commitments made in the wake of earlier scrutiny. “The men’s season hasn’t ever really adopted [size inclusivity] all that much. But from doing the other circuits the previous seasons, I have noticed that brands really stood out for two or three seasons [due to the lack of size diversity] and now appear to have abandoned the efforts to include more shapes,” says consultant and content creator Brett Staniland, who covers the men’s shows. “I think this also resembles culture at the moment, with the Ozempic-demic and problematic beauty standards, which almost always ripple through the industry.”
The lack of diversity was particularly stark in Milan, where — as with last season — there were no plus or mid-size looks at all. Industry observers noted not just the lack of size diversity, but the re-emergence of ultra-thin casting as a dominant aesthetic, with some pointing specifically to the casting and ultra-slim-fit garments at Prada. Elsewhere, Dolce Gabbana sparked online discourse for its show, titled The Portrait of Man, intended to show the many facets of masculinity, but resulted in an all-white, straight-size model lineup.
For commentators, this is less about individual casting choices and more about a systemic lack of accountability. “There’s 100% a backtrack in diversity that matches what we’re seeing societally and politically,” says fashion commentator Louis Pisano. “I’m absolutely not surprised by what I’m seeing, because the interest in change was completely performative and was only seen as a necessity once it became a PR crisis. Now, we’re in this post-woke era where brands feel like they are not obligated to do anything they truly don’t want to do.”
Paris performed marginally better than Milan, but still overwhelmingly favored straight-size casting, with just seven out of 39 shows featuring any model that was not straight-size. In total, 98.5% of looks in Paris were shown on straight-size models, while 1.1% were on mid-size, and 0.3% were on plus-size. The brand with the most size inclusivity was Feng Chen Wang, who showed 13.5% of its looks on mid-size models. Followed by 3.Paradis, who showed 8.6% of its looks on mid-size models and 2.8% on plus-size models. These were the only two brands to show more than 10% of looks on models who were not straight-size.
“Real customers are not always the classic model size — we have some smaller men’s body sizes and some bigger sizes. [The show] has to be honest to our customers and community,” says Wang. “Designing collections that don’t just work well for model-size people, but also can look good on different body shapes — that is something I care about.”
With shows now circulating instantly across social platforms and live streams, the stakes extend well beyond insider critique. “Fashion shows never used to be for public viewing, but now everyone has access, so you’re no longer speaking to just buyers and press, your show speaks directly to consumers — whether you like it or not,” says Staniland.
As brands continue to retreat, Pisano argues that leverage now sits less with industry gatekeepers and more with audiences themselves. “I don’t have a call to action for the brands, because I saw how hard it was to get even the slightest semblance of progress from them, and I’ve now seen how quickly these brands have reverted back to the status quo,” he says. “I think I have a call to action more for consumers, and that is: don’t support brands that don’t support you.”
With data collection by Alyshea Wharton, data analysis by Emily Forkan and additional reporting by Lucy Maguire.
