Not only did I read all of the Sweet Valley High books, I also read Sweet Valley Twins and Sweet Valley University. I continued to read them even after I felt I was too old for them, and I felt so embarrassed about it that when I was checking them out from the library, I made a point of explaining to the librarian that they were "for a younger friend."

I've always wondered what the librarian made of that, and now I have a chance to find out, kind of. Hey, Librarian? Do your library users ever make unprovoked defensive statements about the books they're checking out? And what do you think when they do?

But all of that is beside the point. You're right -- I've always held size six in my head as an ideal as well, and I think I got it the same place you did. In my own personal ups and downs with weight, I have been honestly thrilled with size six (and a little frightened when I was accidentally size four for a few weeks) and pretty OK with size eight.

In a more recent example of popular culture dictating what size we should all be, in the Devil Wears Prada, the main character is a six and is thought of as "fat" by her co-workers - but her co-workers are painted as raving lunatics and it's clear the movie wants us to think six is actually a great size. At the very end, though, we find out that the protagonist has gone a little over to the loony side when she admits to dropping to size four.

I have no idea what teenagers were shooting for in the 80's. I hope someone who remembers chimes in.

Who could forget the Wakefield girls, with their matching lavalieres and their only physical difference the mole on Elizabeth's left shoulder?

I'm pretty sure size 6 was an ideal (not a subversive suggestion, sadly, given how many of those books I read) in those days. "Heroin chic" had not yet happened; if I recall correctly, a kind of glowing health was more "the look." Hard to remember who the "ideal girls" (models, stars considered hot) were at the time...statuesque Paulina Porizkova, maybe? Look at how Madonna's shrunk over the years, to the point where her head has started to look too big for her body, like a caricature. I remember ONE girl in my class who was a size zero, and how this was seen as a kind of freak occurrence--not attractive, a little bizarre. I remember being surprised that they even MADE clothes in a size zero.

I know I feel happiest when my jeans say size 6, though they more frequently say size 8.

--em from EP

Yes. Size 6 was the thin ideal until the mid-1990s. Size 6 was thin, yet curvy, and allowed for boobs. Now the ideal is emaciated, prepubescent boy.

I remember Sweet Valley High well.

Reading all of these comments has been so interesting. I wonder how many other women out there lodged the number 6 permanently into their subconscious, based merely on a few short words in what essentially amounted to a big load of tween fluff.

eh...I've weighed over 200lbs since 9th grade...so, like, 13/14. My weight's fluctuated between 200 and 265 since, and I've not worn less than a 14. It truly doesn't bother me, especially since I'm 5'10" and have a linebacker's build. In fact, if I weighed 160, I'd be 0% body fat, which is impossible. When I was on the Virginia Tech track and field team, I worked out a minimum of 3 hrs a day, 6 days a week, and still weighed 250. I'm at 215 now, wear a size 18/20 and look good, despite society saying otherwise. Moral of this comment: love the way you look regardless of the numbers!