- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 2285
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
- Location: North East Scotland.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/lifestyle/sty ... d=msedgdhp.
It is not really about creating new design or innovation but just a variation on the size of some timepieces.
Probably means that the the overall styling will just become blander and more boring along the way.
Absurd because no inanimate object has gender and sad as we need some flamboyance in life too.
If men's skirts were to become acceptable in the same vein, I'd stick at the opposite side of the aisle.
Well then, I must be a celebrity I've been wearing whatever watch struck my fancy since I had my own job and could buy my own watches. I even made my own watch case from scratch, but forgot to gender it, hmmm.The move follows a trend among celebrities for subverting stereotypes and wearing watches originally designed for the opposite sex.
I tend to stick to 32-38mm as they look best on my wrist, but have some huge ones as well as a few smaller ones.
Anyhow - I find worrying (either way) about gendered watches pretty much peak-ridiculousness. I get that some are overtly "feminine" or "masculine" - but at the end of the day it's a lump of metal/plastic attached to the wrist with a strap, and if it's something someone likes to wear what does it matter?
I do find the move interesting, and hope it doesn't mean the end of fun watches.
"Watchfinder & Co said it will now sell watches as small, medium or large as gender classifications had become "redundant, restrictive and outdated".
The firm is believed to be the first to ditch men's and women's sales categories from its website."
As JeffB1959 has pointed out, Apple first sold the Apple Watch as gender neutral, in two different sizes, back in 2015!
PS It wouldn't surprise me to learn that another company likely predated the Apple Watch in being gender neutral!
https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/time ... r.5279263/
(I find most of those watches boring, but some discussion below the essay-erm-sponsored post ensues - that's worth reading through)
Unisex watches have been around for years and years. And, as the article points out manufacturers have been slowly ditching gender designations as those designations limit who buys their watches - some people just can't think beyond the M/F checkboxes.
I think the only "novel" thing about Watchfinder & Co is them removing a search filter and the "gender" designation on a watch product page. I don't know when they did this, and this article could be a sneakily-placed advert for them anyhow.
Again, I really don't care - when I buy a watch I buy what I like and I wear it.
I promptly filled him in about the fact that it was an heirloom from my maternal great-grandfather and I was merely its custodian for a time before passing it on to one of my offsprings. Great-grandfather's name was Phillipe and in the late 19th Century he dabbled in building small timepieces. He met and took on a partner named Patek and together they achieved some success and the firm makes very fine watches to this day.
Also to my surprise he swallowed the story whole, so I enlightened him and identified my wristwatch as one driven by a battery and purchased at Lidl's for Eur 9.50.
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 1358
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 7:03 am
- Location: West Midlands, England, UK
I’m not a fan of Patek Philippe. They are a touch too traditional for my tastes. Not that I am a fan of Jacob & Co, Hublot or Breitlimg, these are all a touch loud for my tastes. It’s good to have choice though.
- Master Barista
- Posts: 12135
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
- Location: New England (U.S.)
My usual go-to pieces are both 24-hour dial devices, one bought for me as a gift from my father in the 1980s and the other a gift to him, bought by his parents in the mid 1960s.
I have the pretty little bauble I bought for myself that's a necklace (and am wearing as I write this) -- billed as "unisex" (not that it matters) -- and that's the sole one I've bought personally.
Others include my father's (quartz) pocket-watch, my grandfather's pocket-watch, my grandmother's father's pocket-watch, and his younger sister's pocket-watch which is a thing of astonishing beauty. All run, and most see occasional service when I want to be "flashy" or otherwise make a statement.
The only one of the lot that could be even remotely considered as being "gendered" is the Victorian era one that was a 21st-birthday gift to my grandmother's father's younger sister in 1896. It's a pocket-watch, but the fob sets it off as a woman's piece as it was designed to be carried in a blouse pocket and which had a very short chain on it and an extremely ornate fob which was designed to hang outside the pocket the piece was carried in. At the base of the ornate fob is a stamp designed to seal envelopes with wax and which carries her family's initial (which happily coincides with my first initial).
Also in the stable are a couple of digital watches, one of which is a 1970s-era LED watch presented to me as a gift from my grandparents and which as recently been returned to service.
So, no, the timepieces themselves carry no "gender weight" with them whatsoever -- but the ancillary bits can, and that's down to whatever was in fashion at the time, and does not necessarily apply today.
- Distinguished Member
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:54 pm
- Location: Rockland County, New York, USA
- Fred in Skirts
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 3230
- Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:48 pm
- Location: Southeast Corner of Aiken County, SC USA
Always be yourself because the people that matter don’t mind and the ones that mind don’t matter.
"It's watch for crying out loud..."
I only keep one watch... and I wear it daily until it wears out then I buy another $12 watch from Walmart. They last roughly one to two years.
My only requirement is that it NOT be digital. I must have an analog (hands) watch... it's a feature I frequently use in estimating time, which I do a lot every day.