Immaculate Forms is an incredible work and an obvious labor of love. King comes at her "four parts" from a societal and linguistic lens- diving into how society (almost exclusively men in power) viewed these specific areas.

The Breast portion was probably some of my favorite academic writing I have read this year. It was funny, and informative and set the book up with very high expectations. Unfortunately, this is a VERY LONG book, and that momentum started to wane halfway through the clitoris section. While, everything continued to be interesting, I noticed a lack of modern-day knowledge and thought... I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HYMAN IS AFTER READING THIS. Which is a huge oversight in my opinion. She is very aware that past people having different notions of our bodies don't make them "wrong", or "dumb", but I'd like to know what we as modern people know.

For a book that is critical of the cis-male lens, western religion, and western culture- it was pretty much focused on that and could have used some more outside sources. There is also the use of an outdated term for Inuit peoples, I'm unsure if it was in a quotation or not.

Despite these shortcomings, this is still an incredible work that is important historically and honestly taught me a whole lot. King is respectful of gender identities and transgender individuals as well. As an agender reader who just had an ovary taken out, I never felt uncomfortable with her portrayal of our bodies :)

I listened to the audiobook, and narrator Elaine Claxton freaking nailed it. She spoke clearly and knowledgeably. I though the author was reading it for a moment!

Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for an advanced copy in exchange for an honest review :)

This is a wonderful history on the various parts of the female body, as constructed by various parties through the ages. What's clear is that a lot of men, many hailing from religious and (pseudo)scientific and (pseudo)medical backgrounds more or less made up what female (and other) bodies are and how how they work.

While king covers some biological matters (as we think we know it now and thought we knew it then), her focus is less about the inner workings of the female body and more about how it was perceived and demarcated by various societies and cultures and mythologies. Yes, there's a lot of sexism. The mysteries of the feminine just always seemed to be less than and/or derived from men ... hmm, funny how that is. I was hoping for more on how this still guides modern though, including in the medical and professional spheres. I also found that there was a preponderance of Western and Western-adjacent material. I was pleasantly surprised to have coverage of trans and intersex topics, although the former was clearly out of the author's depth. For instance, at one point, she comments on how there's no need to bind chests to be masculine, coupled alongside a discussion on how all people have breasts and men can even breastfeed under certain conditions. Okay.

The narration was superb. Frankly, I don't know if I would've gotten through this dense text in text form.