Androgyn Urbanism

Lately, we came across with really spectacular polemics between two strong figures representing the power, a famous architect and a prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi and Daniel Libeskind. Berlusconi commented on one of the Libeskind’s design for Milan and said that the bent(bowed) structure originates a "sense of inability" because it is not “manly” enough. Plus, the writer Umberto Eco weighed in support of Berlusconi's words saying: "Milan is full of people with crooked members. There will simply be one more in need of Viagra."
Without criticizing the project, I directly want to ask if the terms “manly” and “in need of Viagra” have anything to do with urbanism? And is the representation of the power done by the images of so called “male architecture ”?

Here Guy Debord is once again proves himself; "spectacle is not a collection of images; rather, it is a social relationship between people that is mediated by images". Actually, there is no one considerate about the sense that the project creates, what matters is the image it reflects, and preferably a manly image.

So now, should it be said that we kids are in favor of “Androgyn Urbanism”?

I will talk about that.