Is Toronto's Building Boom Going Too Far?

[TrickyRicky]

Good point by Jacobs regarding the gender divide on this issue. To be honest, and perhaps a little overly dramatic, I have never met a woman who likes tall buildings. Period.

I'm not saying they aren't out there but this may explain why this forum is overwhelmingly male. I know woman who love their condo units or appreciate the convenience, affordability, security of owning their own place in a highrise condo tower, or the access it provides for them to live in the neighbourhood they desire. But if I were to make a gross, light-hearted generalization I would say that most women would prefer to live in a cute old english cottage or it's modernist equivalent were it to offer the same benefits.

 

[RC8]

Good point by Jacobs regarding the gender divide on this issue. To be honest, and perhaps a little overly dramatic, I have never met a woman who likes tall buildings. Period.

I'm not saying they aren't out there but this may explain why this forum is overwhelmingly male. I know woman who love their condo units or appreciate the convenience, affordability, security of owning their own place in a highrise condo tower, or the access it provides for them to live in the neighbourhood they desire. But if I were to make a gross, light-hearted generalization I would say that most women would prefer to live in a cute old english cottage or it's modernist equivalent were it to offer the same benefits.

I know dozens upon dozens of women who like tall buildings. I also know many more women than men who idolise New York's skyscrapers. I don't think there's a gender divide on the issue at all.

 

[Softee]

^ Seriously? I've never met a woman who cared one bit about skyscrapers. If there's no gender divide, then why don't any women post on these and other similar forums?

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

Because they aren't all internet nerds like ourselves?

 

[diminutive]

Good point by Jacobs regarding the gender divide on this issue. To be honest, and perhaps a little overly dramatic, I have never met a woman who likes tall buildings. Period

On the other hand, many women apparently prefer buildings with a concierge and security. Obviously that's not tied to highrise buildings, but midrise structures have to split that cost among fewer units and are less likely to have it.


I only say this because what people "want" in the theoretical sense, or what they view as the most beautiful built form, usually never trumps more concrete issues of cost, amenities and value.

The only way downtown can accommodate all the people it does and will is through highrises. The forest of condos is hardly turning anyone off living downtown. I'd imagine quite a few condo dwellers would agree their buildings are banal, but who cares?

 

[balenciaga]

^ Seriously? I've never met a woman who cared one bit about skyscrapers. If there's no gender divide, then why don't any women post on these and other similar forums?

you have a logic gap here, assuming anyone who cared about skyscrapers would most likely talk about them on an online forum.
In fact, women are simply less interested in arguing about things online. She are probably busy shopping for clothes and furniture etc.

 

[balenciaga]

On the other hand, many women apparently prefer buildings with a concierge and security. Obviously that's not tied to highrise buildings, but midrise structures have to split that cost among fewer units and are less likely to have it.


I only say this because what people "want" in the theoretical sense, or what they view as the most beautiful built form, usually never trumps more concrete issues of cost, amenities and value.

The only way downtown can accommodate all the people it does and will is through highrises. The forest of condos is hardly turning anyone off living downtown. I'd imagine quite a few condo dwellers would agree their buildings are banal, but who cares?

agree. the aesthetics of a condo building only matter to the owners for probably the first 14 days. Then it is the amenities in and surrounding the building and their costs that really matter. We all here discuss how beautiful or not beautiful Trump tower and Shangri-la are, only because hardly anyone here actually owns a unit. If we do, we will care more about more practical things than how they look or how they play in the skyline.

 

[Epi]

*

 

[marsh]

I think these comments are really sexist and are offensive. How do you know that women are not posting on this forum or other forums? (Oh sorry - I forgot women are too busy shopping - what a condescending comment.) How can such generalizations be made that women don't like tall buildings and would prefer "a cute old english cottage or its modernist equivalent".

 

[balenciaga]

I think these comments are really sexist and are offensive. How do you know that women are not posting on this forum or other forums? (Oh sorry - I forgot women are too busy shopping - what a condescending comment.) How can such generalizations be made that women don't like tall buildings and would prefer "a cute old english cottage or its modernist equivalent".

These comments are not sexist. They are just facts. Liking buildings or talking about city planning is just a hobby, why not liking it is considered sexist? There are significant differences in terms of hobby between men and women and you simply can't deny that. Are there as many women who are interested in watching sports, be engaged in politics, studying engineering as men? Obviously not. It is like men are generally not interested in knitting or arranging flowers. It is not sexist, it is gender difference. Sure you can say there are great female politicians and scientists, but are they anywhere near 50% of the total?

Maybe we can do a survey on this forum about gender. I am positive over 2/3 of active members here are male. Maybe you are trying to be politically correct but pretending women and men have absolutely no difference in terms hobbies is not correct.

And yes, women do like shopping more than men do in general. It is funny why liking shopping is assumed by your to be inferior ("condenscending") while talking about architecture is considered more sophisticated? Nobody implied either is a better hobby. It is you who is making the assumptions.

 

[RC8]

As women become more empowered to 'think big' we are seeing more and more female councillors, planners, MPs, architects, etc. I've been in many committees in the University of Toronto's Cities' Centre where the majority of attendees and professionals were in fact women. Toronto's chief planner is a woman, too.

Other than the fact that males are more likely to enter an online debate, I don't see an obvious gender divide - provided we are comparing progressive men to progressive women.

Problem is, of course, the number of women who dare leave their societal comfort zone is still relatively small, and men don't have to do so to access the topics in question.

 

[TrickyRicky]

diminutive, actually I was alluding to the same concept re: many women liking certain aspects of high-rise living without actually liking the built form itself.

Ok, at any rate let's not take this issue too far and recognize that we are speaking about generalizations here. Recognize that some people like to identify patterns in their model of understanding of the world while others are fierce advocates of individualization, meaning they refuse to accept any patterns of behaviour that would undermine the distinct differences between individuals.

For the record my partner believes highrise condos are "ugly sad lego buildings".

 

[balenciaga]

while others are fierce advocates of individualization, meaning they refuse to accept any patterns of behaviour that would undermine the distinct differences between individuals.

.

So I guess it is wrong and sexist to say "women are shorter than men", or "women live longer than men".
Right.

 

[adma]

Good point by Jacobs regarding the gender divide on this issue. To be honest, and perhaps a little overly dramatic, I have never met a woman who likes tall buildings. Period.

I think that more to the point, the, uh, "fairer sex" tends to have a more nuanced vision of urbanism, i.e. while they can *appreciate* tall buildings, they're not tall-building exclusivists, let alone advocates of "tall or nothing". They're more into the "urban fabric" thing, taking stock of what already exists (and the usage thereof) and studying and working on it in increments. Which explains not only Jane Jacobs, but their prominence in the narrative of preservation movements and even events like Doors Open. Indeed, when I speak of those who come into UT with a "new construction" bias vs those with an "existing conditions" bias, when it comes to the bigger picture that can very handily translate into gendered terms, no matter what our own individual gender is.

With that under consideration, balenciaga's advocacy of 20-storey-plus intensification somehow befits "probably busy shopping for clothes and furniture etc" dismissiveness...

 

[adma]

And by way of amendment: if I'm to take social media as a judge, what passes for "fairer sex" urban discussion is less focused upon fetishizing raw physical form than on the "social element", which may encompass everything from "the city in literature" to sociology. Look at it this way: some of the UT hand-wringing over, say, the present pawnbroker/shelter-dotted state of Queen St E would take on a different tone were the participants primarily female.

Whatever it is, it sure ain't simply shallow fluff. And if you think it is, maybe you're cyber-hanging with the wrong kinds of females.