I am a woman of minimal assets, and I’m not talking about my government-salaried bank account.  God blessed me with many gifts, but breasts weren’t one of them.  I suppose he didn’t want me to be spoiled.

Like most small-chested women, I spent my teenage years in padded bras feeling demoralized by my lack of cleavage and my fakery.  Don’t even get me started on the things I had to do to compete in pageants; cutlets, stuffing and duct tape, oh my!  But short of paying a cosmetic surgeon thousands of dollars to insert gelatinous silicone orbs into my body, there isn’t much I can do about what God and genetics gave me. 

I’ve made peace with my less than ample gifts.  I no longer feel that I lack something as a woman because my cups would be charitably described as half-full.  And why should I?  Because Hugh Hefner and his legion of mammiferous ingénues set a sexual attractiveness standard that almost no one can live up to? I think not.

Recently, I’ve noticed that more newspapers, magazines and blogs extolling the virtues of the less gifted.  Maxim even named Olivia Wilde number one on their Hot 100, and her cups don't exactly runneth over.  Is it possible that the mainstream media might finally be acknowledging that sex appeal isn't directly proportional to cup size? 

Last week, The New York Times featured an interesting article which argued that small breasts are actually in vogue.  The writer stated, “In recent years, as people’s weight has ballooned, breasts (mostly made up of fat) have only gotten larger, and commensurately bra cup sizes, too. K-cups now exist. Brandishing a tiny bosom may be a reaction to that trend.”

The article also featured a cadre lingerie designers and retailers who are diving into the shallow end of the market.  These include Lula Lu, Lailides and Eve’s Apples who specialize in selling sultry lingerie to the smaller-chested.  And I, for one, am deeply grateful.