Emilie's Reviews > Girl Parts

Girl Parts by John M. Cusick
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Sep 07, 2012

did not like it
Read in September, 2012

(Just so you know, anyone who reads this, I've got spoilers in here...but it's such an awful book maybe you'd be better off reading my review.)

This is such a bad book.

Really. I mean, it wasn't terribly well-written, it didn't have much of an ending, and its attitude towards women was really, really troublesome. A bunch of girls are basically created (they're androids, I guess) to reform guys by only letting them progress in a romantic relationship very slowly. But that's *all* these girls are for--they're basically sex dolls. And, hah, without any sexual organs. Surprise! The worst part for me was when the main-character-android went to some underground android-modifier and ends up taking home some brand new girl parts! (See what I did there?) She "passes the test" to get them by saying she wants them for herself and not for any guys. And then she goes home and masturbates and it's the BEST THING EVER.

So, to recap, the point of this girl's existence is either to give men sexual pleasure, or to give herself sexual pleasure. That is *all she is capable of*.

Aghhhh. What is this world I live in. :<
10 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Girl Parts.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

02/22/2016 marked as: read

Comments (showing 1-2 of 2) (2 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Sydney I'm not sure that was the point of the book. I feel like the book was trying to point out that this is where society's at. And that we are so disconnected from human nature, we need robots to reconnect us. The androids didn't have 'girl parts' because then, for the guys who receive the companions, it would be just another one night stand. Agree or disagree, I feel like this book handled some heavier topics well. I do believe the ending could've been better, but overall I would say the book was a good one.

I don't think John Cusick wrote this novel to turn women into objects, who do what they are told, follow the rules, rely on relationships to make them whole, and who don't have personalities. I think he wrote it to show us, that we as a society, have done that already. I don't agree that woman should be seen like that, but the truth is, they are. Cusick was able to create a character who broke free of society's mold, and I applaud him for that.

I don't expect to change your opinion on this, and I don't expect you to change mine. I just felt like it would be good for both sides to be heard here.
Live long and prosper!

Emilie Well...
keeping in mind that I've only read this book once, and that was nearly a year ago, I'll make a reply using what I remember from the book.

Maybe Cusick was trying to point out that society is "disconnected from human nature." But, setting aside the question of what "human nature" is supposed to be, exactly...I disagree that society IS disconnected. To connect with people over the internet is different from chatting over the fence, yes, but it is definitely connection, and nonstop connection at that. We live in an era in which we are more connected to each other than ever before.

As for robots being able to connect humans--even the androids in the book, which were pretty intelligent, were not humans. To connect with them would not be human connection. It was a pretty cruel idea, actually, even just to write it--a girl who is built to be desirable, who wants to be desirable, but who is untouchable, who has no purpose outside her service to men, and is unable to fulfill her purpose anyway (that is, to please men by having a sexual relationship with them).

Intended or not, Cusick DID turn women into objects in this book. Women are not like this. If men (or you, apparently?) think that women are like this, then you are mistaken. This may be the perception of women, but it is not the reality. Women are people. Women have their own goals that are irrelevant to men. Women's purpose is not to serve the desires of men. If the purpose of this book was to explore the problems with the perception of women in this society, it failed. The book was about a boy's relationship with his (female-shaped) android. It was not about a woman. It's questionable whether there actually *was* a woman in the story, apart from the moms of the boys. After all--are female-shaped androids actually women?

In fact, I'm not even sure this book passes the Bechdel test, which is REALLY sad, considering its supposed subject matter.

As for "creat(ing) a character who broke free of society's mold", I do not remember any character who even attempted to do so. If you're referring to the female android's desire to have a vagina all for herself...I don't consider the perception of a woman as a primarily sexual object to be "breaking the mold," even if all she wants to do with her sexuality is masturbate or have sex for her own fun.

I don't expect you to agree with this reply to your comment either, but as you commented on my review I wanted to make a rebuttal with my opinions on your comments. Hope you have are enjoying Goodreads. :)

back to top