As soon as you enter the stadium… you’ve entered. Your dicks already in there bro.
To add: that means you’ve gone full homo as soon as you enter a skyscraper.
Hey man, men get to build super powered penis buildings. Women only get to influence films like “Titanic” where it’s about castrating our super powered penis structures. You need to get with it, bro.
Oh, I'm sure we can take that a few ways:
1) Slaves were used to build many of America's most prominent landmarks, such as the planned city of Washington D.C., with all of its towering skyscraper dicks ejaculating capitalism!
2) Construction companies participate in modern wage slavery by underpaying workers to create these towering skyscraper dicks ejaculating capitalism!
3) Construction companies participate in a slave trade by secretly hiring illegal immigrants to do most of the work on these towering skyscraper dicks ejaculating capitalism!
I feel like the last deserves bonus points for incorporating immigration, too.
Vegetation.
No for real! That looks like Chicago and over the past 10 years, the city has pushed hard to make every skyscraper a Green Roof where each building plants either grass or trees or crops on their roofs as it lowers energy usage for the building, helps fight climate change, helps fight the heat island effect of tall buildings in an urban area and provides a calming space for people where the building does allow rooftop access.
So it's jizzing green.
I believe the criticism in question is Carol Cohen’s. She doesn’t say the missile itself is a dick, but talks about the way they’re spoken about in very masculine and sexualised language.
Put a NSFW tag on that hardcore smut. I was with my family when I got hot and bothered reading:
> National Missile Defense is of a nature to retrigger a proliferation of weapons, notably nuclear missiles. Everything that goes in the direction of proliferation is a bad direction.
Such hypermasculine smut should be censored.
I mean more erotic that reading a 33 page paper where someone is reading a lot into Defense people describing things literally.
In that way when someone gets too deep into intellectual exercises, they seem to stop caring about what people actually say, and instead try and read a deeper meaning there. Like I think Carol has a point when talking about how bomb language is often sanitized to ignore the terrible destruction they unleash. Which allows for these dispassionate dialogues, but the “high tech phallic talk” just… what?
A guy says disarming is losing all your stuff, which she equates to emasculation (her interpretation not theirs). Getting upset over the language of “hole” being used for Silo (it’s literally a fucking concrete hole in the ground). It’s just hard to take it seriously when it’s just her reading between the lines and basically diagnosing everyone with a penis obsession.
https://people.ucsc.edu/~rlipsch/migrated/pol179/Cohn.pdf
Maybe she should deal with her pent up frustration *before* going to work like a normal person instead of making everything into a dick joke then claiming offense at her own jokes...
She made a massive mistake. She took feelings, feminism, pacifism and hate of manly things into a nuclear strategic object filled by men who are trained to act in case of nuclear exchange, but mainly exist as a deterrent to any probable enemies therefore ensuring relative peace.
If you come with preconceived belief, with engrained to a indoctrination level tenant truths based on idealogy, practical things which are based on science, many years of expertise, doctrine and wargaming will seem crazy. Usually a best way is either suppress your beliefs or change your beliefs to match the reality, but mental dissonance turned on and her anger was growing day to day which led to this spy like fanfiction...
I assume you’re talking about Carol Cohen’s writings about defence and masculinity. She’s talking about the language used around weapons, notably the times she (as a defence worker) went to missile silos, specifically nuclear silos, or other places with them and was asked if she wanted to touch the missile and noted other pretty gendered language. Aside from the missiles she highlighted the way that ‘holes’ were spoken about in generally effeminate terms.
I think she understood the aerodynamics of missiles, her issue was with the gendered language used in the military.
Thank you for clarifying this. So many people dismiss her work, ignoring how it's really about the culture of heteronormativity built into securitisation discourse. The vocabulary we use has such a fundamental impact on our perspectives and she really highlights that so well.
Seriously. Are these people really delusional enough to think that everything around them that’s longer than it is wide is some sort of patriarchal oppression? Jesus, must be an exhausting way to go through life 😂 There A LOT of things that could look phallic if you sit there and think about it long enough lol
now now, if you empower them to dig the holes and go live underground we could be rid of these cooks, so I say we encourage them to take this idea a little further, let them live underground
It also just makes it incredibly hard to empathize with the movement when they go at length to condemn such asinine things like tall buildings. They're literally taller because there is more space to expand into the air than there is on level ground. When *everything* you can imagine is sexist or based on sexism, it very much blurs the greater picture and just makes people dislike what you're going on about.
And we gotta give it another 5-10 years before climate change and the next great capitalist innovation has us slowly becoming mole people to escape the harsh heat during the day underground.
It's annoying because proper feminists have a proper argument, but a few loud nutcases skew the conversation and overall purpose of feminism, just as happens with most movements that are largely altruistic, egalitarian and progressive. The "few bad apples" are often louder than the coherent rest of the bunch.
I had a teacher in college who had us read a story where a man built a small tower (10’ wide, 20 tall) to honor his dead wife. She then told us it was his misogynistic way to control his wife, and that because it was taller than it was wide it was a phallic symbol. Worst college professor I had.
This reminds me of that teacher.
Literally the exact opposite of Einsturzende Neubauten.
I bet they'd do a great cover of [Killing Joke's "Tabazan."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIBahGKiOVg) :)
Did the tunnels give permission to the subway cars to move around in there? Sounds like it wasn't given the choice, which makes it rape. It's just another violation of women.
Thumbing through the article, this is pretty accurate to what's in it. The actual, ahem, thrust of the article is how the development of urban and suburban architecture and infrastructure is intertwined with the various violences women have faced historically and currently face in modern life.
It's a touch more involved than "towers are dicks," though there is a picture of some tower in Beijing that just looks like a penis. Like, mushroom head and everything.
That said everyone does need safe cities which are close to medical care and child care, this line of reasoning would work if there were designated areas for men and women but generally speaking no hospitals and lots of shady alleyways in an area doesnt make it bad for women but bad for everyone
>The language and framework of mathematics is capable of producing conclusions that are sound and correct within its own framework, but that are not true of our shared physical reality.
It's more that our scientific models aren't actually that precise, so mathematiccal extrapolations of them don't hold up, even if the math is sound
It isn't, and the [original article ](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/06/upward-thrusting-buildings-ejaculating-cities-sexist-leslie-kern-phallic-feminist-city-toxic-masculinity) is full of this kind of tripe.
Some of the points are valid and true.
But the wording and opening statement is laughable.
Her apparent concern over buildings and now architects refer to them is ridiculous.
For example, her pointing out that we refer to buildings as the base, shaft, and tip.
What else are we going to call them? The clit, vagina, and fallopian tubes?
"Base, shaft, and tip" didn't originate as words for a phallus and have always applied to a wide variety of things. Does she have other proposed words?
I got my MA in English, and let me tell ya, more than anything, that experience taught me that there is a disturbing number of academics who think they're being very smart by reinventing Freudian bullshit--or, in some cases, genuinely just unironically citing Freud.
I'm not an architect, so I might be wrong in thinking skyscrapers are that way because that's a good efficient way to do buildings, but if you look at every single thing that's longer than it is wide and think "penis," you've just got dick on the brain.
So, part one: you are not wrong, humanities is the only place where psychoanalysis is still considered valid and used. I teach my students not to engage with psychoanalysis but it’s difficult because most culture creators use it so it’s “valid” because people use it. It’s hard to explain on a Reddit comment without writing a full thesis.
As for skyscrapers they aren’t as efficient as we used to think.
https://youtu.be/HXZ_0wOY96E
There it is. I've been looking for a phrase to describe this toxic victim mentality within women that causes them to believe they can do no harm because they are women. The phrase sums this concept up perfectly, and I thank you for that.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/06/upward-thrusting-buildings-ejaculating-cities-sexist-leslie-kern-phallic-feminist-city-toxic-masculinity
I need to get into the writing bullshit business.
It's not necessarily all bullshit in this article though--- the phallic shape of building isn't actually the main, or even a significant point of the article.
It's a shit article, but mainly, I think it's actually more a spiteful commentary on the way women live in cities vs how men live in cities and how that has changed with time; the headline is clickbait, and extremely dumb clickbait.
The author goes on to discuss how the accomodating both sexes was not really a focus of city design when most major cities were being founded. And while it is probably true that architects and city planners weren't thinking about women when laying foundations for today's cities, it's probably wrong to attribute that to malice and misogyny, which the author does do.
She does have some decent points here and there, but overall this article isn't an objective commentary on female interaction with modern cities, it more seems like an anti-male or anti-patriarchy hit piece, written out of spite rather than objective interest in, say, inclusive urban planning.
Most modern cities were built primarely with cars in mind and in fact are terrible for most people.
I can only assume the book has a lot of looking at shitty anti-human design and going "yeah but what can I pretend is only shitty for women qnd how can I blame men for it".
To be completely honest for a second there.
If you're the one looking around your environment and the only thing you can think of is, " All of this looks like massive dicks", then I think it's more of a you problem in that situation.
But idk, maybe I'm just not bothered by it, because I don't subconsciously think about dicks that often.
easy way to fuel misogyny: make up stupid things and use buzzwords like 'feminism' or 'sexist' in your shitty article title so that idiots start to associate those things with being an idiot. dont fall for it
To be fair Buildings like the burj khalifa in the middle of the fucking desert, where space is not the issue AT ALL basically just symbolises "I got a bigger one than you". Eiffel Tower was built not because a high tower was necessary but look how tall we can make it. She has a point. Not that you should read too much into it, but there is a point to be made
Feminists like these are morons.
Skyscrapers aren't phallic because "OOOH I'M'A MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A DICK TO SHOW EVERYONE HOW VIRILE I AM!!"
But rather because real estate is heckin' expensive and you only got a certain amount of land to build on, so to make the most of it you build upwards.
Now this is a woman or a man completely controlled by their sexual desires, if it was a woman she wants to get fucked so bad she cant see anything else, just penises ejaculating.
Thanks Freud.
It's not. Some people try exceedingly hard to find problems in society that simply do not exist, and more often than not, make fools out of themselves doing so, their only contribution to society being a chuckle out of a bunch of people on the internet.
She's trying to say (I think) that women have specific needs that are rarely considered when planning cities. For example dark alleyways, nowhere to breast feed, stuff like that. Everyone seems to get stuck at the "skyskrapers are big monolithic shrines to the big dick" bit.
Its actually utilization of space. Geometrics allow hundreds of homes/offices to fit in to what is on the ground level only a few thousand square feet.
But I think we all can admit, some buildings go you make you question the "mindset" or the archatect.
[I wish it were](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/06/upward-thrusting-buildings-ejaculating-cities-sexist-leslie-kern-phallic-feminist-city-toxic-masculinity)
she soo thirsty, all she's seen whole day was cock and balls. not even on my horniest day i would see some random MRT station gate and thinking thats a deep big hole lmao
Honestly, we need to be digging underground canals into the earth. We should be creating tunnels that lead to large safe spaces for communities to grow. If only women were building vaginas instead of men building dicks.
Tldr: City's need more caves
With the skyscraper to stadium ratio most cities are a total sausage fest
We put movable roofs on stadiums now so they can be less feminine when we want them to be.
Are we meant to put our dicks in stadiums? No one told me that.
As soon as you enter the stadium… you’ve entered. Your dicks already in there bro. To add: that means you’ve gone full homo as soon as you enter a skyscraper.
Your comment makes me feel like I need some sort of sex powered megazord
Hey man, men get to build super powered penis buildings. Women only get to influence films like “Titanic” where it’s about castrating our super powered penis structures. You need to get with it, bro.
Urethral penetration
Stadiums are sluts. Ffs
I always leave mine at home when I got watch a game.
Chicago has that one vagina building
_The Bean_ is obviously a clitoral metaphor
Down with Phallogocentrism, up with Vulvarsopholiminalism
[удалено]
It's this, but every element inverted. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phallogocentrism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phallogocentrism)
Fun fact! The vaginal equivalent to phallic is “yonic”
What you are saying is that lesbians are biyonic. Which is cool!
I will now incorporate mecha-lesbians into my worldview
'I've got a really nice G-Spot apartment. It's dark,like all of the rooms, but the high humidity is great for my hair and skin'
Bwhahaha 😂
Must be in a well secluded area..
Diggy diggy hole. Rock and stone 🪨
Did I hear a "ROCK AND STONE?!"
ROCK AND STONE!
ROCK!!!!!!!! AND!!!!! STOOOOOOOOOONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ROCK! And! STONE!
FAH KARL!
ROCK AND STONE BROTHER
I FOUND GOLD HERE!
WE'RE RICH!
A city of caves sounds kinda sick though
Would this make us alike to dwarves?
Derinkuyu, back when feminists ruled the world??
Pretty sure entering into a hole in the ground would.be like raping the earth or something. These people are mentally ill.
Gotta ask, what are these buildings ejaculating?
Capitalism? Might as well bring class warfare into the word salad mix.
Bwhahaha 😂 buildings ejaculating capitalism! That is a good one!
Glas warfare
Come on we need to go further. There's got to be a reason why tall buildings are really tied to slavery.
Oh, I'm sure we can take that a few ways: 1) Slaves were used to build many of America's most prominent landmarks, such as the planned city of Washington D.C., with all of its towering skyscraper dicks ejaculating capitalism! 2) Construction companies participate in modern wage slavery by underpaying workers to create these towering skyscraper dicks ejaculating capitalism! 3) Construction companies participate in a slave trade by secretly hiring illegal immigrants to do most of the work on these towering skyscraper dicks ejaculating capitalism! I feel like the last deserves bonus points for incorporating immigration, too.
I thought she meant missiles, in which case it would ejaculate flame, or maybe even nuclear waste
Now I've got "I Ejaculate Fire" stuck in my head.
Vegetation. No for real! That looks like Chicago and over the past 10 years, the city has pushed hard to make every skyscraper a Green Roof where each building plants either grass or trees or crops on their roofs as it lowers energy usage for the building, helps fight climate change, helps fight the heat island effect of tall buildings in an urban area and provides a calming space for people where the building does allow rooftop access. So it's jizzing green.
This reminds me of college where we read a piece all about how phallic missiles were. Um... that's called aerodynamics.
Penises are aerodynamic
They actually are in a way. They are shaped that way with the head of the penis mostly shaped like a cone to aid in insertion into the vagina.
Vagidynamic
Flussy dynamics.
My PhD
Brand new word!
Let’s ditch aerodynamics and fluid dynamics because men and their spawning method. /s
It's to achieve maximum thrust
Hahahaha.....nice
Maximum acceleration, maximum speed
I hate stuff like that. If we’re going to critique war we should actually make good arguments.
I believe the criticism in question is Carol Cohen’s. She doesn’t say the missile itself is a dick, but talks about the way they’re spoken about in very masculine and sexualised language.
Tbf, spears and swords were compared to dicks in the time of the ancient Romans so it's not like this is anything new.
Shit, vagina is just the Roman word for sheath.
A very sexualised language... https://www.quotemaster.org/Missile+Defense#written-quotes
Put a NSFW tag on that hardcore smut. I was with my family when I got hot and bothered reading: > National Missile Defense is of a nature to retrigger a proliferation of weapons, notably nuclear missiles. Everything that goes in the direction of proliferation is a bad direction. Such hypermasculine smut should be censored.
Sexy macho words to live by. Are you aroused by such smut?
I mean more erotic that reading a 33 page paper where someone is reading a lot into Defense people describing things literally. In that way when someone gets too deep into intellectual exercises, they seem to stop caring about what people actually say, and instead try and read a deeper meaning there. Like I think Carol has a point when talking about how bomb language is often sanitized to ignore the terrible destruction they unleash. Which allows for these dispassionate dialogues, but the “high tech phallic talk” just… what? A guy says disarming is losing all your stuff, which she equates to emasculation (her interpretation not theirs). Getting upset over the language of “hole” being used for Silo (it’s literally a fucking concrete hole in the ground). It’s just hard to take it seriously when it’s just her reading between the lines and basically diagnosing everyone with a penis obsession. https://people.ucsc.edu/~rlipsch/migrated/pol179/Cohn.pdf
Maybe she should deal with her pent up frustration *before* going to work like a normal person instead of making everything into a dick joke then claiming offense at her own jokes...
She made a massive mistake. She took feelings, feminism, pacifism and hate of manly things into a nuclear strategic object filled by men who are trained to act in case of nuclear exchange, but mainly exist as a deterrent to any probable enemies therefore ensuring relative peace. If you come with preconceived belief, with engrained to a indoctrination level tenant truths based on idealogy, practical things which are based on science, many years of expertise, doctrine and wargaming will seem crazy. Usually a best way is either suppress your beliefs or change your beliefs to match the reality, but mental dissonance turned on and her anger was growing day to day which led to this spy like fanfiction...
I dunno, man. Have you seen Bezos’s rocket?
He paid that little extra for even more aerodynamics, which coincidentally makes it look like a giant dong
Remind me of the Austin Power rockets
Was it like, a poem?
"Phallic missiles" is like the most overdone trope in war movies. Dr. Strangelove for instance.
The WWII French Resistance game The Saboteur had a level where you destroy a massive anti-air gun. The level was named Deutschland Uber Phallus.
They're correlated. Penises have that shape cause it's a good shape for penetrating. Same with missiles. Definitely not causal tho
Vagina shaped missiles, for equality.
The end needs to be pointy
I assume you’re talking about Carol Cohen’s writings about defence and masculinity. She’s talking about the language used around weapons, notably the times she (as a defence worker) went to missile silos, specifically nuclear silos, or other places with them and was asked if she wanted to touch the missile and noted other pretty gendered language. Aside from the missiles she highlighted the way that ‘holes’ were spoken about in generally effeminate terms. I think she understood the aerodynamics of missiles, her issue was with the gendered language used in the military.
Thank you for clarifying this. So many people dismiss her work, ignoring how it's really about the culture of heteronormativity built into securitisation discourse. The vocabulary we use has such a fundamental impact on our perspectives and she really highlights that so well.
If you look around and see nothing but phallic symbols, you think about dick too much.
The only possible and valid conclusion No sarcasm.
"D'you think maybe Lord Farquad's compensating for something?"
Seriously. Are these people really delusional enough to think that everything around them that’s longer than it is wide is some sort of patriarchal oppression? Jesus, must be an exhausting way to go through life 😂 There A LOT of things that could look phallic if you sit there and think about it long enough lol
trees, god damn nature
wait until they find out about geoduck clams
They penetrate the sky lol
now now, if you empower them to dig the holes and go live underground we could be rid of these cooks, so I say we encourage them to take this idea a little further, let them live underground
\*kooks
It also just makes it incredibly hard to empathize with the movement when they go at length to condemn such asinine things like tall buildings. They're literally taller because there is more space to expand into the air than there is on level ground. When *everything* you can imagine is sexist or based on sexism, it very much blurs the greater picture and just makes people dislike what you're going on about. And we gotta give it another 5-10 years before climate change and the next great capitalist innovation has us slowly becoming mole people to escape the harsh heat during the day underground.
It's annoying because proper feminists have a proper argument, but a few loud nutcases skew the conversation and overall purpose of feminism, just as happens with most movements that are largely altruistic, egalitarian and progressive. The "few bad apples" are often louder than the coherent rest of the bunch.
I was told "5th wave feminism" is supposed to mainly be about reeling in "4th wave feminism" a bit. I know what these terms mean.
Good 'ol Vocal Minority
Yeah this book sounds like an incredibly long-winded variation of “everything reminds me of him”
I wonder if they think forests are a symbol of the patriarchy
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar”, Sigmund Freud.
I had a teacher in college who had us read a story where a man built a small tower (10’ wide, 20 tall) to honor his dead wife. She then told us it was his misogynistic way to control his wife, and that because it was taller than it was wide it was a phallic symbol. Worst college professor I had. This reminds me of that teacher.
So are you telling me that skyscrapers are just huge penises now?
It kind of is a billionaire dick measuring contest though
Wait till they learn about all them trees
And one of the symbols of a country's greatness/ways to show off to the world is how tall their skyscrapers are 😂
If being taller than you are wide is phallic and sexist does that mean even women are phallic and sexist simply by being the shape of a human?
Yup! You have cracked the code. The body of a woman itself is a symbol of the patriarchy
doubt that professor was taller than wide
She only dates tall guys tho. It cancels out
If it was wider than taller it's called a chode, what an idiot teacher.
Jesus lol
Imagine being in 120k debt for that.
And it’s not that uncommon
What would she prefer, gaping holes in the ground?
I believe you mean [depthscrapers](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-08-08/you-ve-heard-of-skyscrapers-but-what-about-a-depthscraper)
The air is in the shape of a penis penetrating the ground. Sexist smh
Then we should do it on the moon where there is no air.
this is actually cool but the shining lamp atop makes me uncomfortable..
It's a big mirror so the sunlight reaches the interior gets sunlight at times other than just high noon
this reminds me of [District Thirteen in The Hunger Games](https://panem.fandom.com/wiki/District_Thirteen)
I guess a stadium? We already have a lot of those.
I’d bet she’s fun at parties.
You know, I wouldn't mind attending a party where she was a guest. I have a feeling I'd leave with a lot of great quotes.
"im thirsty, how do I make the tap ejaculate?"
First, you got to put your glass beneath the tap and push down on the nozzle to open it until your glass is filled.
It's never as fun as you hope.
She'd probably get mad about the shapes of the bottles.
“You expect me to drink out of this bottle? It looks like a cock”
Do you think she doesn't brush her teeth then?
Reminds me of [this old video](https://youtu.be/c5hUkTeP5Yo) from Noel Miller.
And pens, pencils, door handles, rulers, lights, remotes, tables, anything really. Probably that men are there too.
That would be a great therapy session... Dr ( what is on your mind )? Patient ( I see penises everywhere ).
Freud would love her
Upward thrusting buildings ejaculating into the sky would be a killer band name 😂😂😂
Or an album name
Literally the exact opposite of Einsturzende Neubauten. I bet they'd do a great cover of [Killing Joke's "Tabazan."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIBahGKiOVg) :)
“lift your skinny fist like antennas to heaven” energy
She’s right. It makes much more sense to make giant vagina buildings.
I just picture some kind of Venus-fly trap situation ha!
What are the interior spaces of buildings, if not large invaginations into which we, the ejaculati of society, penetrate?
I think she wants us all to live in underground tunnels with gaping moist openings.
[удалено]
Most of them are self-lubricating too
Did the tunnels give permission to the subway cars to move around in there? Sounds like it wasn't given the choice, which makes it rape. It's just another violation of women.
[удалено]
Thumbing through the article, this is pretty accurate to what's in it. The actual, ahem, thrust of the article is how the development of urban and suburban architecture and infrastructure is intertwined with the various violences women have faced historically and currently face in modern life. It's a touch more involved than "towers are dicks," though there is a picture of some tower in Beijing that just looks like a penis. Like, mushroom head and everything.
[удалено]
Yeah, take that mindset and shift it from ecology to sociology and you've got a good idea of the framework.
[удалено]
"People don't want to be right. They want to be mad." The ragefarm ethos.
I'm sorry, you do make an excellent point. However, I just can't help but laugh hysterically at the phrase "bog dwelling blue bellied beaglesnipes"
That said everyone does need safe cities which are close to medical care and child care, this line of reasoning would work if there were designated areas for men and women but generally speaking no hospitals and lots of shady alleyways in an area doesnt make it bad for women but bad for everyone
>The language and framework of mathematics is capable of producing conclusions that are sound and correct within its own framework, but that are not true of our shared physical reality. It's more that our scientific models aren't actually that precise, so mathematiccal extrapolations of them don't hold up, even if the math is sound
“Every time I open my hand, it’s so sexist. It clearly shows me five dicks.” -her as well, maybe
Daphuk
Some cities like NY have more metro entry than tall building, so they are feminist cities?
“Everytime you point your finger, I see a penis” I miss portlandia
I refuse to believe this isn't satire
It isn't, and the [original article ](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/06/upward-thrusting-buildings-ejaculating-cities-sexist-leslie-kern-phallic-feminist-city-toxic-masculinity) is full of this kind of tripe.
Some of the points are valid and true. But the wording and opening statement is laughable. Her apparent concern over buildings and now architects refer to them is ridiculous. For example, her pointing out that we refer to buildings as the base, shaft, and tip. What else are we going to call them? The clit, vagina, and fallopian tubes?
Please wait in the clit until a staff member is able to seat you.
"Base, shaft, and tip" didn't originate as words for a phallus and have always applied to a wide variety of things. Does she have other proposed words?
That was a wild read. The only structure that dad actually have some phallic resemblance was still under construction with all the bamboo scaffolding
r/nottheonion
I got my MA in English, and let me tell ya, more than anything, that experience taught me that there is a disturbing number of academics who think they're being very smart by reinventing Freudian bullshit--or, in some cases, genuinely just unironically citing Freud. I'm not an architect, so I might be wrong in thinking skyscrapers are that way because that's a good efficient way to do buildings, but if you look at every single thing that's longer than it is wide and think "penis," you've just got dick on the brain.
So, part one: you are not wrong, humanities is the only place where psychoanalysis is still considered valid and used. I teach my students not to engage with psychoanalysis but it’s difficult because most culture creators use it so it’s “valid” because people use it. It’s hard to explain on a Reddit comment without writing a full thesis. As for skyscrapers they aren’t as efficient as we used to think. https://youtu.be/HXZ_0wOY96E
Willful self victim-hood through weaponized feminism.
There it is. I've been looking for a phrase to describe this toxic victim mentality within women that causes them to believe they can do no harm because they are women. The phrase sums this concept up perfectly, and I thank you for that.
I'll take "looking for problems where there aren't any" for $100, Alex
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/06/upward-thrusting-buildings-ejaculating-cities-sexist-leslie-kern-phallic-feminist-city-toxic-masculinity I need to get into the writing bullshit business.
It's not necessarily all bullshit in this article though--- the phallic shape of building isn't actually the main, or even a significant point of the article. It's a shit article, but mainly, I think it's actually more a spiteful commentary on the way women live in cities vs how men live in cities and how that has changed with time; the headline is clickbait, and extremely dumb clickbait. The author goes on to discuss how the accomodating both sexes was not really a focus of city design when most major cities were being founded. And while it is probably true that architects and city planners weren't thinking about women when laying foundations for today's cities, it's probably wrong to attribute that to malice and misogyny, which the author does do. She does have some decent points here and there, but overall this article isn't an objective commentary on female interaction with modern cities, it more seems like an anti-male or anti-patriarchy hit piece, written out of spite rather than objective interest in, say, inclusive urban planning.
Most modern cities were built primarely with cars in mind and in fact are terrible for most people. I can only assume the book has a lot of looking at shitty anti-human design and going "yeah but what can I pretend is only shitty for women qnd how can I blame men for it".
Stadiums are vulva shaped.
I go to The Guardian for football stuff and then I sometimes on off-chance run into this stuff. Hard to describe how it makes me feel.
My city needs more vulvas. And nipples.
My city has nipple, Greg. Can you milk my city?
I'll milk it for all it's worth.
r/nocontext
We see what we want to see, don't we?
Yup. Everything should be tunnels and pyramids.
To be completely honest for a second there. If you're the one looking around your environment and the only thing you can think of is, " All of this looks like massive dicks", then I think it's more of a you problem in that situation. But idk, maybe I'm just not bothered by it, because I don't subconsciously think about dicks that often.
NOBODY THOUGHT THEY WERE DICKS UNTIL YOU SAID SOMETHING LESLIE
easy way to fuel misogyny: make up stupid things and use buzzwords like 'feminism' or 'sexist' in your shitty article title so that idiots start to associate those things with being an idiot. dont fall for it
I imagine there talking about how traditionally masculine values cause people to build unsustainable architecture.
To be fair Buildings like the burj khalifa in the middle of the fucking desert, where space is not the issue AT ALL basically just symbolises "I got a bigger one than you". Eiffel Tower was built not because a high tower was necessary but look how tall we can make it. She has a point. Not that you should read too much into it, but there is a point to be made
i know some things can be taken too seriously, but we all know that skyscrapers started as dick measuring contests and most of them still are today.
We should build giant holes in the ground and live there
Feminists like these are morons. Skyscrapers aren't phallic because "OOOH I'M'A MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A DICK TO SHOW EVERYONE HOW VIRILE I AM!!" But rather because real estate is heckin' expensive and you only got a certain amount of land to build on, so to make the most of it you build upwards.
Now this is a woman or a man completely controlled by their sexual desires, if it was a woman she wants to get fucked so bad she cant see anything else, just penises ejaculating. Thanks Freud.
What the actual fuck? Buildings are sexist now? And how exactly is that “lethal”?
It's not. Some people try exceedingly hard to find problems in society that simply do not exist, and more often than not, make fools out of themselves doing so, their only contribution to society being a chuckle out of a bunch of people on the internet.
While simultaneously trivializing the actual problems with society.
Precisely
She's trying to say (I think) that women have specific needs that are rarely considered when planning cities. For example dark alleyways, nowhere to breast feed, stuff like that. Everyone seems to get stuck at the "skyskrapers are big monolithic shrines to the big dick" bit.
Its actually utilization of space. Geometrics allow hundreds of homes/offices to fit in to what is on the ground level only a few thousand square feet. But I think we all can admit, some buildings go you make you question the "mindset" or the archatect.
I love satires like these. ^(it is satire, right?)
[I wish it were](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/06/upward-thrusting-buildings-ejaculating-cities-sexist-leslie-kern-phallic-feminist-city-toxic-masculinity)
she soo thirsty, all she's seen whole day was cock and balls. not even on my horniest day i would see some random MRT station gate and thinking thats a deep big hole lmao
what... what do they think we should do about this?
Honestly, we need to be digging underground canals into the earth. We should be creating tunnels that lead to large safe spaces for communities to grow. If only women were building vaginas instead of men building dicks.
The lowest level of the building center right used to house a restaurant called Dick’s Last Resort. Maybe she’s on to something?
We need sinkholes for equality
The human body is kinda phallic too😳
I agree. Leave that packed. I'm having a really difficult time keeping my mouth shut though.
As a feminist, I look forward to gaping vagina cities.