skirtcafe.org

I just read this and it set me thinking;
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.
Steve.

Unless I missed something in that article, there was no mention of the Apple Watch which sports a large face and is gender neutral. Well, at the end of the day, to each their own, people will buy and wear what they like.

The move follows a trend among celebrities for subverting stereotypes and wearing watches originally designed for the opposite sex.

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.

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.

The linked article is very poorly researched.
"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it will now sell watches as small, medium or large as gender classifications had become "redundant, restrictive and outdated".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!

Here's another:

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)

shadowfax wrote: ↑Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:34 pm PS It wouldn't surprise me to learn that another company likely predated the Apple Watch in being gender neutral!

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'm anal in that NOTHING I wear on my outings comes from the men's side of the store, and that includes watches as I prefer to wear feminine specific, i.e.: smaller case styles. Oh, yeah, I'm further anal in that I have a gold plated and silver plated watch to pair with gold and silver plated earrings.

In September 2018 aboard the traditional sailing vessel 'Ryvar' on our way across the Baltic from Keil-Holtenau to Denmark we, the Nordenhammer Shantychor sat down in the main saloon to our first evening meal. To my surprise one of them admired my wristwatch and enquired about 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.

Tom

Great story, Tom!

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.

The timepieces I carry not only keep time but keep history alive. There is no gender in any of them save one.

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.

It seems like April would be a good time for a Fool to buy one of these watches

People still wear watches? I gave mine up in the 1990s when I got my first cell phone.

I have several wrist watches that see service on a daily basses, meaning I switch them off as I see fit. all are large dial watches and run on batteries and or sun light (IE: solar powered). I did not buy them because they might be a certain gender but because I liked the looks of them. I have always liked large dialed watches.. Makes them easier to see the time...

My last three watches have been "womens". I wear them all the time, even at work. Nobody has said anything about it yet... and if they did...

"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.

Ralph wrote: ↑Fri Apr 02, 2021 12:30 am It seems like April would be a good time for a Fool to buy one of these watches

I rest my case.
Steve