That is APPALLING. I used to read Babysitter's Club, Sweet Valley High, Goosebumps and all manner of crappy kid lit. Did I know that those girls were better than me? Yeah I had an idea. But now if I was a kid and I knew they were tiny too, just like every other media mini-hottie (celebrities are getting younger, no?). Man... how many parents will be OK with giving these books to kids because they were acceptable in the 80s, without realizing there's insidious changes?
Maybe one size isn't that big of a deal. But maybe in the 80s no one cared about size and it was just one detail about the twins among many (they're blonde! etc). But girls these days are constantly bombarded with bullcrap about size even compared to how it was in the 80s. And what if they discover the twins have shrunk a size? Does that mean the readers _ought_ to be noticeably thinner than their parents were at their age?
Maybe this bothers me so much because I'm a fat woman now. I remember when I was 12 y.o. and started noticed my thighs rubbing together. I really think I changed--I thought it was the start of the inevitable slide toward being large, like my mother, and always struggling with dieting, like my mother.
If I had stayed in sports and not concerned myself with size I think I would have been a lot happier as a teenager. It turns out that athletics in the U.S. is different from where I grew up. In the U.S. you're supposed to have talent. Where I grew up even the talentless unco-ordinated people could be on a D-level team, and no one thought the worse of them.
Anyway. Argh. There isn't ONE FEMINIST at the entire publishing house responsible for these new SVHs?

What I find most interesting about this, is that if the publishers wanted to be true to the series, the new releases would have the twins as a LARGER size. A 6 in the 1980s is probably a 12 now...I looked for a conversion chart but I couldn't find one.

I never read SVH, but I was an avid reader of Nancy Drew...I don't seem to remember her size, or that of her cohorts, ever being named.

This is terrible and I soooo don't support it, but for the sake of curiosity/devil's advocate, haven't clothing sizes changed? For instance I wear a have a lot of vintage dresses that are marked sizes 11/12 and I am much smaller than that in modern clothing sizes. I'm not saying that was their intention...I am Just curious.

Like claricedurdan, I also grew up on BSC and Sweet Valley High.

The only real damage that Sweet Valley High did to me was set up unrealistic expectations of high school life. I expected one madcap adventure after another, nice boys falling over themselves to take out nice girls, and generally a more sanitized, sunny, chipper version of the high school I went to.

Ironically, I do remember that there are two SVH books that deal specifically with weight loss and body image. The names escape me, but in one, an overweight girl wants to be cheerleader. She eats candy bar after candy bar and whines about not being able to make it. Then, she decides she is going to change her life, throws away the chocolate, runs lap after lap on the the track, and kicks ass at the cheerleading tryouts.

Later this same character, losing the boyfriend she got after getting skinny, decides to diet again. She starts to totally restrict food, and becomes anorexic to the point she needs hospitalization and therapy. It's never really resolved if she's "magically cured" or not, but she loses boyfriend anyway and gets on with her life, such as it is.

My freakish memory to books I read as a pre-teen reminds me that there is a lot of crap going on within the pages of a lot of the SVH books (friend saying she refuses to "weigh a pound more than 110," and the twins being the "perfect size" and having the perfect looks), but there were also some good books within the series that normalized girls who liked sports or rock bands or didn't completely "fit the mold." However, looking back, it still displays a lack of ethnic diversity within the characters and shows an extremely heterosexual bias.

I don't know how I feel about the change. I think these books have, in the past, given mixed messages about reality and body image for girls and it seems as though the tradition continues.

Growing up as poor and socially awkward, I ate these books up like some kind of forbidden candy. However, as a person of color, I remember feeling disturbed that there weren't any characters in the books who looked like me (at least, if there were, I can't remember them. I DO remember when they finally introduced a black girl in the Baby-sitter's Club series, though!). I guess it doesn't surprise me that they would make the twins skinnier, because the whole series had such a huge focus on stereotypical physical beauty.

Can I suggest an alternative explanation? One that is-- in my opinion -- a bit more disturbing?

Due to the phenomenon of Vanity Sizing in the US ( See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanity_sizing ) I point out that the girls probably aren't in fact one pound heavier or lighter than they were in 1983.

But what does the _emphasis_ on the dress size question mean? Why the Jeep Wrangler to replace the FIAT? Why call attention to these things? Because it's all about dress sizes, cars and the attendant rampant self-deception.

Oh! And let me add the obligatory - "All you damn kids! Get off my lawn!"

Man, even at the age of ten I was so annoyed at how stupid these books were and how obnoxiously 'perfect' those twins were supposed to be that I never read more than one. So I'm not worried. Start messing with Sleepover Friends, however, and we will have problems.

From the wiki article: "The twins and many of their classmates being unrealistically "beautiful" in a model-like way and never having acne, oiliness, pubertal awkwardness, bodily odors, or greasy hair the way most real-life teenagers have."

http://www.fitme.com/Fitme/html/PublicRelations/coverage/Vanity_Sizing_AZ_Rep_0104.htm
It seems that they simply updated the "perfect" size to today's standards. It would be nice if they didn't feel the need to ascribe perfection to a particular body size, type, hair color, and race, but there it is. I think here is where the problem lies, and not necessarily the numerical value assigned to perfection itself--but that these books geared towards young girls are perpetuating the myth of physical perfection (as determined by dominant social culture) in the first place.

Can I suggest an alternative explanation? One that is-- in my opinion -- a bit more disturbing?

Due to the phenomenon of Vanity Sizing in the US ( See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanity_sizing ) I point out that the girls probably aren't in fact one pound heavier or lighter than they were in 1983.

But what does the _emphasis_ on the dress size question mean? Why the Jeep Wrangler to replace the FIAT? Why call attention to these things? Because it's all about dress sizes, cars and the attendant rampant self-deception.

Oh! And let me add the obligatory - "All you damn kids! Get off my lawn!"

god, that's disgusting. i remember the phrase "perfect size six" sticking in my head from reading those books as a kid, and it caused me enough anguish as is, since i was a size six for all of about fifteen minutes in sixth grade. if it had been "perfect size four" i probably would have stopped eating altogether, rather than having a pickle for lunch and thinking "perfect size six, perfect size six."

I always depised those books even when I was a kid! I never liked that these books were geared towards the "perfect girl." Which is not the perfect girl because perfection is diffence and uniqueness. As a Native American lady...I always wanted more Native American woman and girls represented in my stories...

I like Sweetgrass... and I still have a copy that I like to look through occasionally http://www.amazon.com/Sweetgrass-Paperstar-Book-Jan-Hudson/dp/0698117638

But I love reading the Boxcar Children!

Sizing has indeed gone down- it's called vanity sizing. When the books were written (the early 80's), sizes like 0 and 2 basically did not exist, and a 4 was more like a modern 0.

If you look at vintage clothes, you'll see if they have sizes listed they are much higher numbers- if you look at really old clothes, a modern 4 is equivalent to like a 40's or 50's size 12!

Anyway, the whole thing is effed up, and defnitely a feminist issue. Men's clothing is just measured by actual waist and chest sizes, women get an arbitrary (shrinking) number that has no constants and differs from store to brand to era.

For the SVT, how about eliminating what size they are altogther? that would be a real positive update.

I was always a BSC girl myself, and have on occasion felt like a huge nerd because I never gave a damn about SVH. Considering the issues i had with weight and the BSC (you're telling me in a revolving group of 9 or 10 friends, not a single one is even a little chubby?) it sounds like I'm glad I skipped SVH.

I'm glad to see that other women who read this schlock grew up to be feminists. I read probably every book, and the Sweet Valley University books too. How embarrassing!

I'm sorry to see the down-sizing of the twins, but at the same time, does it make that much difference? Size 6, size 4 - both are unrealistic for some of us. At least they're not size 0.

The next step to make the series more modern will be to add tons of designer names on every page, and make the cover look like some obnoxious designer print. That's my least favorite thing about popular YA books right now. Every sentence is like "Jessica ate her Pink Berry and decided to call Elizabeth. She rifled through her Haylie bag by Dooney and Bourke and pulled out her new pink Razor. 'Elizabeth?' she said. 'Oh hey, I'm at the Chanel outlet right now!'"

Hate.

I never read SVH (I was into Stephen King early on). Anyway, I came across a tidbit in Newsweek yesterday showing how much designer name brands are placed into current teen lit.

Personally, some parents might wonder why my mom would let me read King when I was 13, but I'd rather let my own kids read authors like him instead of this crap.

I tried reading these books when I was a little kid, but I didn't like 'em. I preferred the Ramona books much better. But, it's terrible that they are making these "updates" in order to promote poor body image among young girls. I recognize that it must be really tough growing up as a young girl these days with all the emphasis on body image, Britney Spears, and being "Miss Bimbos". This is just another straw on the camel's back and makes it even more important that feminists continue to create positive role models for young girls and work to try and smash the sexist ideals that young girls are constantly told to aspire towards.

To me, this just seems like the natural progression of what the SVH books already were. I read 2 SVH books when I was younger, because I would (and still will) read almost anything. I thought they were stupid, and now that I am an adult, I think they oversexualize children. I will actively discourage my daughters from reading them, and I would have done so even without this new nonsense.

So, wait, about this vanity sizing thing: I'm a 6 in most clothing stores. Does that mean I'm actually a 12 due to sizes going up? I'm really confused.

I always found these books boring as hell, but maybe that's because I was such a nerdy kid. In kindergarten, the Laura Ingalls Wilder books and some American Girl series really sated my desire for historically-focused girl fiction, although the latter's commercial bent creeped me out even at age six; by age seven and eight, I was more into the Babysitter's Club (although I hated that every member had a schtick and that the artsy one was kind of dumb) and most of all Lois Lowry's Anastasia Krupnik books, which I completely ate up (how could I not when they were about the weird foibles of a bookish girl with a list-making compulsion and a bohemian family?).

Like several other commenters, I suspect the size-changing in the Sweet Valley has more to do with the inflation of clothing sizes, though. That's not to say that it isn't a weird priority for those updating the books, though. God forbid the twins grow in girth as most Americans do during their lives!

Why does "vanity sizing" bother some people so much?

Damn fatties, saying they wear a size 12! They should really be a size 22!

I mean seriously, who is it hurting?

Size 6 = Perfect Size?

LAME!!!!!

[P.S. Jfaustus, is that better :-)?]

I love 80's style Calvin Klein jeans (like Brooke Shields wore)and buy the size 10s on ebay whenever I can find them. If I went into a store now for jeans, I am a 4 or 6 depending on who makes them. I think I am healthy and normal.

Is Jessica still aerobicizing to Jane Fonda in her Walkman?

pearl, The main thing that bugs me about dress sizes is how they detach your body from any objective, confirmable size, and put the question of how fat or thin you are in the hands of clothing designers.

I mean seriously, who is it hurting?

Well, honestly? It bugs the shit out of me because I hate having to look for a size 0 or 2 or 4. It makes me feel complicit in a beauty standard that I don't agree with and don't like. But it doesn't matter that much.

Now I remember when the perfect size was a size 10, as memorialized in that Bo Derek movie. Because I'm old like that.

I think I may have skimmed through one of these SVH books. I was more into Goosebumps, The Boxcar Children and Hank the Cowdog when I was in grade school. And then I pretty much started tackling my parents books after that, took me way longer to read them but I enjoyed them more (Starship Troopers nearly kicked my ass in fifth grade, but I made it).

Aren't the new standards just going along with what's trendy now? Like, back in 83 would we all have been upset that they deemed the perfect size a "six"?

And I can't remember where I read it but there is going to be this new trend of product placement in young adult lit books, much like started with Gossip Girl. They will turn the youth into consumers at all costs.

I read SVH religiously as a kid, and I over-applied it to my life often, since I have a twin sister.

The fucked up thing is that I really struggled with body image in high school and I always remembered the Sweet Valley Twins' size 6, and it tended to make me feel better since every other aspect of pop culture seemed to convey that a size 2 was ideal.

Obviously, I've developed better coping strategies since then (I've also discovered feminism) but its strange to think about the various effects a simple mention of body size will have in an adolescent series like SVH.

Has anyone read any of the books lately? There's a group on livejournal called 1bruce1 that hilariously snarks on them.

As amusing as the recaps are, though, the size 4 thing is really the least of our problems. There's tons of rape, attempted rape, and false accusations of rape. There's all sorts of harassment that's just shrugged off.

Never having been much for SVH (another BSC girl here), I have nothing to add on that topic but "ugh," so in case anyone's looking for alternatives, let me just second everybodyever on Little House, American Girl, and Anastasia Krupnik. Tamora Pierce and Dear America and its spinoffs also won't let you down. And there's still Judy Blume. And Little Women and Anne of Green Gables may have their shortcomings, but I still think they do more good than harm.

Of course, I may be biased.

Sorry, but this is the best SVH site around:

www.thedairiburger.com

The writer rips the books to shreds and is completely hilarious - but, like most of the readers there, admits to voraciously consuming them as a child. I loved the SVH books but reading her site now I am in shock about the kind of shit I was putting in my brain.

I should mention that the book that sucked me into Sweet Valley was from the "Sweet Valley Twins" series, where the twins' new sixth-grade teacher was a flagrant sexist.

To me, the two Sweet Valley series, as well as The Baby-Sitters Club, defined what was "normal" - to me, it was more about class than it was about body image.

I'm pushing 30 and those books - along with magazines - still haunt me today. I'm convinced people at Bantam knew that the sexist teacher book would lure feminist kids into the ultimately shallow world of Sweet Valley.

It's sad that not only does society require real women to be skinny, but now it requires fictional literary characters to be skinny also. It looks like the media isn't the only form of entertainment brainwashing our society. What happened to literary characters being the "every man"? Readers are supposed to be able to relate to characters. Stressing the size of the characters definitely doesn't do that.

This is terrible and I soooo don't support it, but for the sake of curiosity/devil's advocate, haven't clothing sizes changed? For instance I wear a have a lot of vintage dresses that are marked sizes 11/12 and I am much smaller than that in modern clothing sizes.

Yeah I was thinking this too.
Does it really matter if the books said they were a size 6 or 2 or 8. The fact that any are designated as "perfect" sizes in a paragraph that reminds you of their long blonde hair, blue eyes and dimple on their left cheek at the intro to every book in the series is just, well, eww.

I read the Sweet Valley books because my last name is the same as the main characters and I thought that was about the niftiest thing ever. *Yes, I was a naive child.*

I got bored, though, with kid lit about the time puberty started and went looking for 'other stuff' and found the western section in the library...reading Louis L'amour, Lonestar and Larry McMurtry at the same time as BSC and SVH really mess with my head. :)

Too clarify, L'amour is the SVH of westerns, while Lonestar is the hardcore, poorly written porn and McMurtry is ugly, depressing and has the ability to bring on fits of hopelessness and melancholy. Oddly enough, L'amour is still among my faves and Lonesome Dove is on my shelf of 're-read soon'. SVH and BSC were sold off at a garage sale many many many moons ago.

I just remembered - I'm so glad "Gossip Girl" wasn't around in my time.

Growing up as poor and socially awkward, I ate these books up like some kind of forbidden candy. However, as a person of color, I remember feeling disturbed that there weren't any characters in the books who looked like me (at least, if there were, I can't remember them. I DO remember when they finally introduced a black girl in the Baby-sitter's Club series, though!).
There was a SVTwins with a black transfer student as the man character, I don't remember what it was called.

I'm glad to see that other women who read this schlock grew up to be feminists. I read probably every book, and the Sweet Valley University books too. How embarrassing!

Yes, I read and watched so much crap when I was a kid, it's kind of a relief to see I was not alone.

"However, as a person of color, I remember feeling disturbed that there weren't any characters in the books who looked like me"

I was more into Sweet Valley Twins than Sweet Valley High but I read a few of the SVH ones too (and outgrew the SW stuff by high school, before the series with the twins in 2nd grade and the series with the twins in university came out).

Did you read the one in which Jessica dyes her hair black to be "more exotic" then gets rejected at a modelling contest at the mall because the store's seeking an "all-American California girl" or whatever (as if California was first populated by blondes?!). That pissed me off.

"Start messing with Sleepover Friends, however, and we will have problems."

That one's still around?

[First time poster, so apologize for any double posting. ]

Woman of color and massive SV fan here. My sister and I memorized entire passages of books and still quote the High ones to each other on occasion. I also read the Twins, but they are far less quotable. I feel no shame whatsoever over my childhood tastes. I think childhood is a time that we're exploring different elements of our world--what matters is becoming an adult who can look back, parse out the negatives and the positives, and reflect on them in a way that improves other kids' experiences.

For example: I heartily second the poster who said that there should now be feminist/humanist women (just hitting 30, I'd say) who are editors at publishing houses and can excise garbage like "perfect size" references.

As a minority child of one of the only immigrant families in my small town, the books were "my" space wherein in I participated in American school culture. Mentally, I became each of the major and minor characters in turn (though funnily, I don't remember ever wishing I resembled the twins).

I still own almost the entire SVH series, large numbers of the Twins series, and some of the (admittedly crappy)Uni series. I do not plan on selling them if I can avoid it. I want a record of the sort of stuff I was interested in as a kid.

And, if I ever get a professorship, you can bet your bottom dollar my students will be paying a visit to a little place called Sweet Valley. I am a big believer in academic studies of pop culture.

Oh, and heck no, there had better not be any egregious changes to my youthful memories, neither for SVH or SVT, Babysitters' Club, Junior High, Sleepover Friends, Sugar and Spice, or Sorority Sisters.

Everyone who was hating on the consumerist Gossip BLEH Girls series, keep piling on the hate. I glanced through one when shopping for a young friend, and if you extracted every brand-name from such books, the page length would be reduced by half.

I hated the Sweet Valley High books too. Just could not find anything in common with them at all. I had a brief romance with the Babysitter's Club, but my absolute favorite books when I was a teen were anything by Madeleine L'engle and Margaret Mahy's "The Changeover". They actually contained girls I could identify with and (not bragging, but looking back in astonishment) strong female main characters.

I have many, many styles of books that I would love to "rewrite" in a feminist way if I had the time, and teen fiction like SVH is definitely one of them. Someday....

This really, really gets to me. When I started reading this post I already knew what size the twins used to be before I got to the bottom. It's absolutely ridiculous, but, like diptutod, that size 6 was burned into my brain. When I turned, well, 13 or so and no longer wore a size 6, it BOTHERED me. Even now, I know I subconsciously feel like 6 is the "normal" and "average" size even though my factual side knows that is not the case. And I KNOW that I got that belief from reading those books. This is the kind of thing people dismiss as no big deal, but lowering it to 4 really, really bothers me, and I agree with previous posters that, clearly, it would be better not to mention it at all.

(at least, if there were, I can't remember them. I DO remember when they finally introduced a black girl in the Baby-sitter's Club series, though!

But there was always a black girl in the BSC since the beginning (I'm pretty sure). She was a junior member Her name was Jessie and she did ballet. She was BFF with Mal who was red-headed and had like 6 sibling.

If you like BSC, check out this blog that recaps the books. I never read SVH because when I wanted to (age 7) the librarian told me I was too young. So I worked my way through Louisa May Alcott's books and Anne of Green Gables instead. They were always thicker than SVH books so I always figured that had to count for something, right?

Now reading that SVH referred to perfect anything in relation to a teenage girl's body, I'm glad I skipped them. When I was very young, I got the idea that the 'perfect' size was 8 (don't know where) so I've always tried to be that small (which I never was), but reading that the "perfect" size is actually even smaller, well...it wouldn't have been helpful.

Thank you and good night.

@signthelist

This isn't all that important but I swear Jessie was not a character in the series until later. There was a book somewhere later on in the series that dealt with her family moving into the neighborhood and having to deal with racism from all of the lovely white people of Stoneybrook... oh god, I'm 28 years old, why am I writing about this??

I really feel like my childhood is being systematically destroyed.

I bet they'll get around to making She-Ra resolve her differences by making her enemies lemonade and giggling a lot.

Are Goosebumps books inspired by "Hostel" and "Saw" next? Trashy young adult books with "contemporary relevance" of this sort (e.g. Gossip Girl series) are already plentiful. I think these publishers should let the Sweet Valley Twins rest in peace as icons of '80s teenagedom.

If anyone is interested, I just emailed the Publisher which is a wing of random house. PLEASE EMAIL THEM YOUR CONCERNS! 'knopfpublicity@randomhouse.com'

Ok, I'm finding it difficult to get worked up over the precise choice of "size 4" causing body image problems. There are many reasons for this: (1) I just now outgrew my clothes from middle school, where I was a size 4 and definitely averaged sized or even a bit heavier than the other girls. (2) As of 2002, a juniors' size 9/10 corresponded to a misses' size 4 in at least formal wear. I also remember that being the first time I acquired clothing in an even numbered size because juniors clothing is sized in odd numbers. (3) My body issues were caused by all the size 1/3/5 popular girls. (4) Clothes in my size always used to disappear first during a big sale.

My objections are instead more language-oriented. For starters, "size six" is a thousand times more pleasing to say than "size four" and changing that is changing an artistic choice. As a writer, I would be livid if that happened to my work. (Even if it was juvie-lit drivel.) My next big objection is that this is the first "upgrade" listed in the press-release. Really? The fact that the girls are skinnier is the most important change in the whole series? While I totally hold the argument that size six is a literary choice, I in no way think that it is a truly momentous choice and worthy of being the first item on the press-release.

That's why this has me pissed: the most important thing about the girls is their waistline.

"I really feel like my childhood is being systematically destroyed."

You just reminded me of this:

http://www.metafilter.com/70296/The-Wakefield-twins-are-back-and-thinner#2060839

"It makes me want to murder when they 'update' books for kids.... I've had this (murderous) feeling many times - the first time, when I found an edition of 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' where (and you'll recall how poor and money-concious ol' Charlie was) all of the british currency was translated into dollars. Unfortunately, the number one awesome thing about reading novels is that you get to learn about other times and places. Jesus, would it kill kids to know that there was a time when there wasn't an internet?"

"While I totally hold the argument that size six is a literary choice, I in no way think that it is a truly momentous choice and worthy of being the first item on the press-release."

http://www.metafilter.com/70296/The-Wakefield-twins-are-back-and-thinner#2060854

"I am stunned that the publishers were so stupid to point out the girls' size differences between the 80s books and their 2008 counterparts.

"Or...

"I am NOT stunned that the publishers were so CUNNING as to point out the CONTROVERSIAL changing of the girls' size differences - because 'Girls Drop 2 Sizes' is a way better headline than 'Fiat Becomes Jeep Wrangler'.

"Either way - bastards."

Mina, that's interesting. Judy Blume's Are You There, God, It's Me, Margaret was also updated recently to provide more modern information that girls can relate to as far as their periods, etc. I have mixed feelings about that example.
It was already out of date when I read it years ago and it prompted a great discussion with my mom, who had to use the products described in the book rather than the pads and tampons we're used to. So while it's good to have something girls can relate to, it can also be educational to know that things have changed.

But that's a bit off topic, since obviously the change to the SVH books don't seem to be very constructive or helpful at all.

Jessie was not an original member of the BSC. She moved to Stoneybrook during the first book that is narrated by Mallory-- number 14, I think? Claudia, however, was an original member, and both her parents were Japanese, though she was born in the US.

One thing I will say for the BSC, even though they were incredibly badly written, they did actually address things like white privilege and racism. I remember that when we meet Jessie, we learn that her family didn't receive a visit from the Welcome Wagon like Dawn's family did (Dawn had arrived in Stoneybrook about ten books earlier) and Mallory was all like "Oh shit, racism really does exist, even thought I've never seen it before!" (Except she doesn't say "shit" because unlike normal 11-13 year olds, BSC members never swear). Then in one of Jessie's books she points out that it's wierd that, when she describes herself, she has to say "oh, I'm black," because none of the white members of the BSC would ever have to say "oh, I'm white." I clearly remember reading this when I was nine or ten, and it really did make me think deeply about the way that anyone who isn't white is marginalised in many little ways. And it affected me so much that I still remember it clearly now, seventeen years later.

I never read this tripe. Well, ok- my older sister had these. I read a little of one once, and it talked about how the twins mom was still skinny and perfect too, and something about how when she bent over, her stomach folded neatly in half or some shit. I was like: BARRRRFF. Well, she also read Seventeen and Jane magazines- also BARF. I found that disgusting and creepy. I was reading Heinlein, William Gibson, and Azimov at that age. And I am a size 8. I think. I dont really care.

"Mina, that's interesting. Judy Blume's Are You There, God, It's Me, Margaret was also updated recently to provide more modern information that girls can relate to as far as their periods, etc. I have mixed feelings about that example.

"It was already out of date when I read it years ago and it prompted a great discussion with my mom, who had to use the products described in the book rather than the pads and tampons we're used to. So while it's good to have something girls can relate to, it can also be educational to know that things have changed."

This reminds me of how some books get "updated" editions that keep all the original text and add another chapter, introduction, etc. with the new stuff. :) Stephen Jay Gould did that with _The Mismeasure of Man_ and Richard Dawkins did with _The Selfish Gene_.

Did Judy Blume change the novel itself or include an afterword with the "pads don't all require belts anymore" info?

I was always glad Elizabeth was the smart one...because that's my name. :)

Shouldn't the twins be a "perfect size zero?" Isn't that today's standard? It's like in Devil Wears Prada...0 is the new 2, 2 is the new 4, and 6 is the new 14.

Which I guess makes me about a size 625.

Gag.

What the hell is a "perfect" size 6? Depending on the style of clothing, the designer, sometimes even the store I am purchasing clothing from, I am a size 18 to 24. (Yes, I am a beautifully curvy "fatty"!) Does that make me a "perfect" 18? 24? 21?