Connemara
Stylish Dinosaur
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 38,388
- Reaction score
- 1,828
One more time and I'm not bringing the "for her pleasure" rubbers for our next encounter.
Mon dieu! THow am I supposed to get to feelin' good papi?
![confused.gif](https://www.styleforum.net/images/smilies/confused.gif)
STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
One more time and I'm not bringing the "for her pleasure" rubbers for our next encounter.
Some Canadian Brutalism:
That "house" is absolutely hideous, not to mention the entire concept is marsupialed. When did creating an idiotic idea become a necessity to classify something as "contemporary art/architecture"?
I have noticed this trend, starting from about 5-10 years ago, of modern-looking homes that utilize heterogeneous materials and unusual shapes that I find very unattractive and overwrought. A good example is this entire development in Austin that is built in this style.
It is very driven by magazines like Wallpaper* -- and the whole 'lifestyle' thing.
The Glass House uses modern technology (large scale glass panes and minimal steel structure) to limit the visual obstruction between a home owner and nature. What you don't get is a suffocating faux historical revival home that is outdated in both construction technique and function (unused dining rooms, small living room etc.). Instead you get abundant sunlight that varies in tone and angles 365 days of the year with no need for artificial daylighting, a serene view of the outdoors, and a quiet machine for functional and healthy living. Or a bus stop as you comprehend. I'd take it any day over the assumed lifeless ************* you're probably living in.