Yesterday, our man Klosoff complained about watches that go big to go home. “I’m one of those hidebound traditionalists who thinks 34mm is the right size,” Oscar asserted. While 34mm might be a tad petite for most male readers, there are plenty of sub-39mm watches from which to choose. A lot of them are “ladies’ watches.” But that doesn’t mean you can’t wear one, right? Case in point: the new 37mm Citizen Calendrier . . .
Like many timepieces marketed to the fairer sex the Calendrier has diamonds. Citizen isn’t saying if the sparklers were lab grown. Given the $475 price tag, we can assume they’re manmade. Given the parade of celebrities wearing iced-out Rollies and Pateks we can also assume that it’s “safe” (i.e., “manly”) to wear a diamond-encrusted timepiece.
Only the Calendrier isn’t “encrusted.” The diamonds are tastefully arranged as hourly indices – except where the equally-sized month, day and moonphase subdials intercede. Speaking of lunar complications, the Calendrier’s designers took the brave and I’d say correct decision to display the moonphase on the bottom of the lower subdial, avoiding visual clutter.
Placing the date indicator on the outer rehaut, Citizen’s created a balanced, symmetrical dial. With a light-powered Eco-Drive quartz movement motivating the hands, the Calendrier is nearasdammit a perpetual calendar. Whether or not you’re down with the pink gold-toned steel bezel and two-tone bracelet is another question. That brings us to the money shot: would you wear it?
OK, what about the Patek Philippe Ladies’ Nautilus Blue Dial Stainless Steel reviewed by Mr. Chaudhry? Clocking in at 35.2mm it’s not a “Jumbo” Nautilus, but it’s still a fraction above Mr. Klosoff’s preferred 34mm diameter. The gray market wants $43,500 for the watch – a significant hike from the $26,755 retail price. But it’s available and costs nowhere near as much as the now discontinued Patek Philippe Nautilus 5711 ($125k).
Truth be told, there’s a world of women’s watches with subdued spizzarkle for men who’ve decided that bigger isn’t necessarily better (horologically speaking). I’m particularly taken by the $12,750 Sedna Gold and diamond 38mm OMEGA Aqua Terra 150M above. Note: there is no equivalent bi-metal man’s Aqua Terra.
Mr. Klosoff dismisses Sinn watches as insipid. Maybe he didn’t scan their ladies’ collection.
The 434 St GG S hits his 34mm sweet spot with Sinn’s [Q] technology. It minimize the stepper motor’s electromagnetic impulse because quartz watches emit weak electromagnetic radiation. “Since some people are highly sensitive to such radiation and a watch is worn directly on the body for an extended period of time, we offer shielding.”
Some people? That wouldn’t be gender specific would it? ‘Cause this is Sinn’s only line with the shielding technology.
Anyway, as my youngest daughter says, watches don’t have gender (topic explored here). And in these days – where some people consider gender identification separate from chromosomal gender, where men wear watches with enough bling to light up Times Square – men (however you define them) are free to wear women’s watches.
Bottom line: if you don’t mind downsizing to go back to the past, the world is your Oyster. Perpetually? We shall see.
Am I allowed to mention the hot topic article on that other site where the woman railed against gendering watches? Like Mr. Chaudry, the original gender designation is irrelevant to me, as long as it isn’t permanently marked as such. I don’t even have to awkwardly wonder into some women’s section thanks to the internet. Thanks for reminding me that the site has precedent for male review of a female watch!
Gemstones, rosy golds, and the fondness for mother-of-pearl dials are my main issues, the second being extra narrow bands. Ignoring all that, I’m fine with everything on this page and more. There are the jokes about having to buy a Lady Datejust for the AD to supply the Rolex you really want. Those are 28mm, which might be too far of a leap even for me.
Truth be told, I’d buy a preowned or vintage “Ladies'” Tudor if it was at least 34mm and the price was right.
I’m a woman and generally prefer smaller, lady size watches. When I ordered my Calendrier I expected it to be my size. When I got a man sized watch I was a little surprised. I have consoled myself that there would be no room for the day, month and moon phase complications. I’m a typical woman, too, in that I bought my new watch for the look of the face and the date display. I still love the look of the watch and look forward to many years of enjoyment.
I must admit, you get used to different sized watches and their appearances fairly quickly. The lunkheads that insist that anything under 40mm looks dinky on their swole wrist are either lying or lack neuroplasticity.