Men Vs Women: Are Luxury Watches for Men Only?

Share it with your friends Like

Thanks! Share it with your friends!

Close
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
or copy the link

Rolex and Omega sell a lot of women’s watches, but is there life after Rolex and Omega for women? A lot of higher-end watch brands don’t make watches for women, let’s take a look at why that is.

Comments

Matt Stevens says:

"…and they STILL have nothing to wear."

Yes.

Rich Dubbya says:

For me.. At least… Watches are the only TRUE male expression for jewelry and still be modest. Bracelets? Chains? No.. A watch for men is just a proper expression. At least for me.

celestialfix says:

Don't forget Cara Barrett, the Girl Friday over at Hodinkee…….she's pretty sharp. Suzanne Wong is great.

It's Pat says:

I will argue that your average woman knows more about luxury watches than your average man. That's been my experience anyway.

ivan smith says:

Ladies watches lack iconic models. That usually drives a hobby like watch collecting.

Men usually buy the fanatsy of a watch that climbed Everest or was worn while the driver drove lemans.

I think watchmakers like Richard Mille are smart in that their watches can be worn by either sex without making the wearer look like a douche.

Neil Lucente says:

Hi Rich. One thing you didn't mention is how gender bias in occupations have influenced the diversification and production of time-telling products. The plain fact is that watch manufacturers just did not make watches for women because they could not diversify watches for women to the same extent that they could for men. Up until the 1970s, women were virtually restricted from jobs that required the use of watches as essential tools — think pilots, firefighters, doctors, race car drivers, cops, military, tugboat captains, factory supervisors, astronauts, postmen, CEOs and on and on. Your average homemaker mom in 1963 would probably just use a wall clock or a simple 3-hander for the most part. To be a working man meant you had to wear a watch and the watch had to suit the purpose. Work defines both the man and the watch and the watch industry has responded by designing and producing purpose-built watches . . . for men. Not women because up until a couple generations ago, women in general were effectively barred from many, if not most, professions.

Mike Hydropneumatic says:

My sister has a good job (well payed) but she lately bought a Danish Design watch, for her it is about the design, not movement, history or exclusivity.

She has a friend and she buys pretty expensive stuff like shoes and bags and I believe she bought a Chanel (~4000-5000K). Not horology but jewelry.

My brother in law is a CEO of a small company and wears a Tissot and Davis, his hobby is records and music reproduction. He spends quite a bit on hifi and modifies existing gear like new caps or psu etc.

One great distinction is that in general diamonds and yellow gold look gaudy on men yet on women it looks classy, difference between bad and good taste.

Maynard Joseph says:

if women encroach on our hobbies i.e Luxury watches. Then we should encroach
on their hobbies, such as collecting luxury Handbags. After all what is good for
the Goose is good for the Gander.

stranno strannovasrr says:

Good theory. I agree.

Watch Dog says:

I bought my wife the hulk and the James Cameron. She loves them and wears them regularly. I recently bought the moonphase. She's wearing it now. Solution = give her your watch

Write a comment

*