The most famous early likeness of a human, a woman, is the "Venus" of Willendorf, found in 1908 by archaeologist Josef Szombathy near the town of Willendorf, Austria. The first figures we know of which represent the human form are believed to be more than fifteen thousand years old; they are all female, very round and bumpy, with prominently displayed sexually erotic areas (breasts, belly, rear). Some call these curvy girls fertility Goddesses, but for all we know they are the Stone Age equivalents of Pamela Lee, and were tucked by males under primitive beds like a favorite photo from Playboy.

The tiny Willendorf statue is voluptuous and sensuous, and dare I say - sexy. You almost believe you can reach through the aeons and touch her soft skin, and whisper to her how beautiful she looks in her intricate head covering. This ancient female, who probably was worshipped and cherished in her own time, would most likely be overlooked and ignored by many modern Western males - perhaps even ridiculed. Does this mean that this woman was not beautiful? Actually, in my own experience at watching the so-called "standards of beauty" shift and evolve, it just indicates that people are fickle, and that what one considers "beautiful" is set by forces other than just brute "nature." Humans are the only animal on the planet who can convince themselves wholeheartedly one day, year, decade or century that a certain feminine type with a particular hair color, style, body shape and height is the pinnacle of beauty; and decide the next that this same woman is grotesque.

Over the last 30 years of working in the "world of beauty," I have witnessed some changes in this mercurial "standard of beauty" which I find disturbing - even dangerous.

A story we are currently running in the View from the Community section of LamasBeauty is what sparked my ruminations on the capricious and unpredictable concept of "beauty." The young woman who wrote this article, a fashion model, is fully aware that her chosen career has caused her to make certain sacrifices (such as...food), but she understands and accepts her lifestyle. She enjoys the benefits (high pay, glamour, excitement), and endures the drawbacks (rejection, uncertainty, and more rejection). Over all, I think her attitude is fairly healthy. She has a great understanding of her strengths, as well as her weaknesses. That said, if my own daughter had told me she wanted to be a model, I'd have strongly discouraged her. And remember, this is coming from someone who has worked in the beauty industry for three decades.

Quite honestly, I believe that it is insulting to women to try to force them to squeeze into what is, in reality, an absurd (and always changing) ideal. My advice to my own clients is always, "Do what suits you best. You can't force your body to be what it isn't." That ultra-thin look that is so popular now is but a fleeting dream. Most women would have to literally starve themselves to look like Kate Moss. "Today the ideal woman has the legs and hips of an adolescent boy and the breasts of a mature woman. That's impossible for most of us to achieve without surgery," says Anne Bolin of Elon College in North Carolina, who studies women body builders." And with genetics playing the largest role in how tall you are and what your body shape is, in my opinion this type of surgical intervention is downright brutal.

I think it's unnecessary to try to create an illusion of what your body isn't meant to be. And in this dieting, obsessed-with-thinness-culture in which we live, this notion is almost radical. Women need to embrace and accept who they are, and understand that who that person is is perfect - whether she is shaped like the mysterious prehistoric Venus of Willendorf, or a six foot 14 year old waif parading around in clothes which her Mommy might be able to afford, but could never fit into.