There has been this ongoing theory that many architectural creations are in essence phallic symbols. I never really bought into that line of thought. It seems so Freudian; everything has to do with sex and human nature cannot escape it.

We as a species are far more sophisticated. Just because a building stands straight up doesn’t;t mean it is supposed to be a penis. First off, structurally you cannot have a wider top than base. Secondly, a wider base (ala a pyramid) is more stable, but you are wasting all that space near the top with that tapering effect. So by simple logic and efficient use of space, that is the reason why buildings look the way they do.

Yes, there may be some examples to the contrary:

• Washington Monument

Yeah, maybe a little. But it really is an obelisk, like from ancient Egypt. Sorry

• Eiffel Tower

I know the french are into that type of thing, but I still am not buying it.

• Space Needle

The previous most powerful erection in Seattle, it is more of an artsy-futuristic shape. It was made for the World Expo, so I still am not buying the phallic theory.

But there is this:

Yes, this.

This is the new Amazon building (currently in construction) in downtown Seattle. And lo and behold, there are balls. Testicles. A nutsack. Right in front of the new 40 story Amazon building.

C’mon now Bezos, really? Now everytime a family passes by Westlake and 7th they have to close their children’s eyes. You have impregnated Seattle with this new building. Cock and balls Bezos, you have given us cock and balls.

There is nothing else to say really, but I may have to revisited the phallic symbol theory.