The heroine, Chloe, is a dedicated (perhaps overzealous) animal rights activist who falls for Brett, a jock who does not share her values. She finds she is so busy with Brett that she has less and less time for her activism--and then Brett pressures her to give up her animal rights work altogether because he is concerned for her safety.

The dilemma Chloe faces will be familiar to many vegetarian women; indeed, many girls and women period. It is inevitable that relationships change us, but how much change is too much?

Unlike many books of the genre, the book does not have a simplistic happily ever after ending. Chloe's problems, including the tension between Brett and her beliefs, her relationship with her (noncustodial) mother, her faltering friendship with a fellow activist, and her grandmother who suffers from dementia, are not magically solved. What we do get is a realistic, bittersweet ending, with some hope for the future.

This was one of my favorite books! I am a vegetarian, and thisbook helped me keep faith, when my friends would say negative thingsabout me. Everyone should read this book even if you are not avegetarian!

I love this book and so will you. It's so good i'm going to buy it here. Once you start reading it you can't stop. I even stayed up until 5:00 in the morning just reading it. If I like it you will to

While I will admit that this is a good summer read, I would not call this book a MUST read. It had a good plot, but had somewhat boring, and at times unbelievable characters. Although I am not gay, I did enjoy seeing what it's like to come out through someone else's eyes. I will never know the pains of coming out, but this book gave me a good idea of what it's like on the other end. It is the story of Holland, a high school senior who is coming to terms with her own sexuality and her feelings for the mysterious and exciting CeCe. It taught me not to judge people and showed me that everyone should be treated equally no matter what. I would reccomend you read this book at some point, whether you are gay, bisexual, straight, or homophobic. It really does have depth to it if you take the time to see it.

Well I can some what relate to Holland and Cece!! Because I'm bisexual!! I have girlfriends, and I'm not afraid to brodcast it over the net or anything I think how she had to keep it a secret was kinda dumb, because if you are afraid to tell people about the real you , your being true to yourself as well as other people!!

In fact, I finished all 250 pages in approximately 4 hours.

Bittersweet -- reminded me of my first love. The excitement of first seeing her, the awe when she told me she felt the same; that first kiss.

But it also shows that homophobia still exists in a big way; describes some of the fear that comes with just being who you are. I found myself crying hysterically through half of it. And yet, it points out that support can be found, if not in the places you'd most expect.

All in all I'd recommend this book, especially to anyone just coming out.

Peters continues the story in this sequel to "Revenge of the Snob Squad." In this book, the girls deal with budding romance as Jenny harbors a secret crush for Kevin Rooney, schoolyard god and member in good standing of the "in" crowd. Meanwhile Prairie enlists the help of the group to ignite a romance with computer nerd Hugh Torkerson (aka "Tork the Dork.")

This book and its predecessor give readers a welcome respite from books about "goody-two-shoes" groups of girls like the Sweet Valley High or Babysitters' Club series. They also deal with heavy subjects--social isolation, eating disorders and dysfunctional families--with a combination of seriousness and sarcasm that ring more true than the way these subjects are handled in "fluffier" books.

I liked this book. It was pretty cool, and on the overall, quite well-written. I finished it in one day though. The story wasn't too long, and I felt the author could've written it even better if she'd put in more to give us more complete, 3-dimensional characters. However Julie Anne Peters has tackled the problems that teenagers nowadays do face, so we can relate. The plot was o.k, really, at first it started off a little not-so-good, but then the story started to thicken and you got more involved with Jazz and Antonia. That was when it started to get interesting and made you want to read on. I liked the part about the girls' peer counseling programs, and their discussions. It seemed genuine enough, like typical conversations, not fake or contrived. Like I said though, this is a good book on the whole, even if not excellent. Those aged 11 and above will probably enjoy it. 'Define "Normal" ' makes for good, fun reading.

What do people consider normal? To somepeople mormal is not wearing big baggy cloths. Well to Jasmin there is no such thing as being normal. The other charactor of the book Antonia think that Jazz is not normal because she wears big baggy cloths. This book is about a girl named Antonia who is counseling a girl named Jazz(short for Jasmin). At first the two girls dislike each other and then towards the middle of the story they.... Well to find out you will have to read the book. The author is Julie Anne Peters.

now i read what a lot of people have posted and i thought this book was great in my opinion.
Define "normal" was one out of three books to be nominated for the California Young Reader Medal. and believe it or not, this book got everyones vote (out of 18 people) at my school! it was up against Hope Was Here and Speak.
teenagers(antonia and jazz) helping eachother out, helping eachother see life in a new light, showing eachother that talent is something not to take for granted, and when you think all hope is lost... it may not be.
it shows you that punks arent always mean and arent always poor. that preppys arent always rich and are all stuck up. whats that saying? dont judge a book by its cover.. and its totally true. these girls may dress a certain way, but that doesnt set their attitude.

Subject matter NOT appropriate for elementary grades because it is full of name-calling, hate, sneakiness, deceipt, lying, breaking of school rules, etc. Introduces children to "psychic stuff".

I read Revenge of The Snob Squad. I thought it was a good book. I liked this book because it had some adventure and it also had some sad parts. I think other kids between the age's ten-twelve would like to read this book. I recommend this book to other people.

"Revenge of the Snob Squad" is a dark, middle school comedy about a group of self-proclaimed misfits. They are thrown together on a gym class track team and learn that revenge can indeed be sweet.

Peters' narrator, the compulsive eater Jenny, is called "Lardo Legs" by the popular "in" crowd. Instead of swallowing her bitterness, she ingests a constant stream of candy bars. She also points her sarcastic barbs at those around her--parents, classmates and even herself. She joins ranks with Prairie Cactus, who has a strange name and a pronounced limp, hulking Max McFarland, the biggest girl in the sixth grade, and Lydia Beals, a whining, klutzy girl the other kids call Bealsqueal.

Together the Snob Squad discovers that there is more than safety in numbers; there is also pride and friendship.

This book is about how a new girl came to school, and another girl taught her how to not be a geek anymore. It turned out that that girl turned out to win the State Spelling Bee.

Given that this is virtually the ONLY book in existence concerning women's ice hockey, I'd give this book a 5. The authors and publisher deserve plaudits for writing about this subject. On the downside, this book, when compared to objective standards of quality and editing, stands in need of improvement and could have benefited from further refinement. One example: One entire chapter is devoted to just one woman from the sport (out of many that could have been chosen) who blathers on and on and on about her views of ice hockey. (Who cares?) This chapter of the book reads as if the two writers just set a tape recorder down in front of the person and then typed everything she said verbatim. If I wanted to read a magazine interview, I could have gone elsewhere such as reading women's ice hockey stories and interviews in some of the hockey trade journals. A book is supposed to be a SYNTHESIS of various points of view. I appreciate the two authors showing me their raw interview material but this kind of self-promotion by one individual female ice hockey player belongs in an appendix at the BACK of the book, and NOT in a book chapter. Certainly everyone would agree that this kind of monologue by one single female ice hockey player SHOULD NOT HAVE CONSTITUTED AN ENTIRE BOOK CHAPTER! C'mon! Let's do some of our own writing and research. And what qualifications does this person have to presume to speak for the entire sport anyway? Second point of criticism: While the story of women's ice hockey is in part a story of sexism and the struggle between the sexes, I think the tone of the book and the title could have been less adversarial and resentful toward the existence of men's ice hockey. "Too Many Men on the Ice" makes it seem like a zero sum game. Can't men as well as women play the sport? The title suggests not. In fact, the title and the tone of the book suggest that there are "too many men on the ice" playing the sport to the exclusion of women. This is not what wome! n's ice hockey is about. There should be enough room in the sport for both men and women to play ice hockey. This isn't a war between the sexes. Women just want to be recognized and granted equal rights to train, get appropriate coaching, ice time, etcetera just like the men. Do the authors really believe that there are "too many men on the ice?" If so, I am disappointed in them as people and as female journalists and authors. The authors' book title and their hostile and adversarial tone toward male ice hockey players undercuts what these fine women players stand for: No one should be saying that there are "too many men on the ice!" Nor should anyone ever say that there are "too many women on the ice." There should be enough ice time for everyone who wants to play the sport. The book comes off as a well intentioned but somewhat superficial attempt to cover the sport. I suspect other writers will come along and pick up where these two left off. But nonetheless, hats off to these two young authors for devoting themselves to a worthy subject.

This book was horrible. I was forced to use it in a mandatory brainwash...er, history course for school. The book essentially goes like this:

We settled Massachusetts, and the indians, blacks, gays and women were persecuted.

Then, we started a westward expansion which led to persecution for indians, blacks, gays, and women.

During the revolutionary war some white guys fought or something, but it is important to note that the indians, blacks, gays...

This book is a proselyting tool, a transparent piece of propaganda. I didn't convert.

This book tries to teach history without actually including any concrete information. It outlines general trends without emphasizing the historical facts on which the trends are based. While it's certainly important to recognize progressions in history, it's extremely difficult to learn about them based only on the text's vague, 50-page summaries, all of which fail to mention any form of historical evidence.

As a student, I found this book's approach to teaching history disastrous and mildly insulting. First of all, it fails to convey even the most cursory knowledge of history by shunning, at all costs, cruel Old Regime teaching methods that might require DATE memorization or familiarity with historical FACTS. With nothing to "Lock On" to, it's very hard to retain anything. Even worse, however, are the implications of the book's approach. I like History because I enjoy being able to look at a set of evidence and trying to figure out, based on otherwise stale information, what *actually* happened, what life was like. Somehow, I got the sense that by describing outright "what life was like," the book implies that to force students to learn INFORMATION is useless, that students are unable to think for themselves and interpret historical information with any accuracy.

I think I should comment, also, on one reviewer's dismissal of this book as "Nouveau History." I come close to BEING one of the "Tenured Radicals" this reviewer had so much disdain for, and I still hated this book. I would hate it if I were communist. There's so much wrong with it that to criticize it for its left-wing perspective is plain silly.

I would recommend "The American Promise," by James L. Rourke, Micheal P. Johnson, and a few others instead.

This book provides a balanced overview of U.S. History up to 1877. The treatment of social and cultural history is particularly stong. The prose is, for the most part, quite lively.