The icons of beauty promoted by our mass media culture may be oppressive, but couples expert Pepper Schwartz, PhD, reminds us that body is a state of mind.

Just as in fashion, we have fads for bodies. Society liked the lanky flapper in the 20s and willowy beauties in the 70s. Now the norm demands a fit superjock at the start of the new millennium.

Isn't it inconvenient that our genes don't adjust that quickly? We inherit a body type from our genetic pool, and just following the latest diet or going religiously to the gym won't give us the breasts, chest, calves, or butt that we choose from a magazine page. We can get closer, but relatively few (and most of them, relatively young) can have the perky or plentiful breasts or six-pack abs so adored at this cultural moment.

Ironically, body is a state of mind. While the media may seem to be doing its best to make most of us feel miserable about our bodies, the people with the "best" bodies frequently aren't so happy about theirs either. Models, perfection by anyone else's standards, obsess over the most minute of flaws--probably because some photographer has pointed them out, perhaps as the reason for not getting a job. Of course, some beautifully proportioned people are perfectly satisfied, but others rage about a couple of new pounds as if they were suddenly disfigured. Teenage boys and girls--beautiful as a group to older people's eyes--are mercurial about their appearance. They adoringly catch their visage in the mirror one moment and despair over their looks the next.

How do we cope with our insecurities when self-doubt is reinforced by countless men's and women's magazines? Men, who used to be exempt from such exacting standards, are now just about as battered by beauty expectations as women are. Both men and women, in increasing numbers, fork over thousands of hard-earned dollars for surgical intervention: more refined noses, rounder breasts, even thicker penises. Should we all just give up and try to feel happy the way our genes spit us out?

Probably. It's tough to resist the profound influence of our culture; only the strongest amongst us seem to have any immunity. Still, hope springs from some unlikely sources--in this case, the world-famous Pamela Anderson Lee (she of the "Baywatch" breasts and circulating homemade porno movie). Pamela recently made major news by deciding to reduce her breast size--even though her measurements had, to some extent, propelled her to stardom. To much fanfare, she had her implants removed, sizing down to just comfortably buxom.

One small act for womankind--but maybe for mankind, too. Having fantasy breasts just might not be necessary for supreme sexiness. It can even be a burden. Anderson is still hot without superbreasts (and perhaps more comfortable). For us lesser mortals (also lacking model weight, legs, and other equipment), her defection from saline perfection might contain a small but significant lesson: We can be sexy enough just as we are--and certainly we should think three or four times before we subject ourselves to surgical body shaping. We don't need to be Pamela to be sexy--in fact, perhaps Pamela didn't either. We can be hot without the biggest breasts, the smallest tush, or a six-pack abdomen. We can just be ourselves, and usually, that will work out to be enough.