No, this post has nothing to do with politics. Itâ€™s a nice Sunday afternoon, and Iâ€™m trying to do a one-day political detox. Rather, this has to do with wristwatches.
I have always worn mine on my left wrist. Being right-handed and being old enough to remember when one had to wind a wristwatch, it seemed to make sense to leave oneâ€™s dominant hand with easy access to the watchâ€™s stem to permit the regular need to turn the stem back and forth to put the tension in the mainspring that permitted the gadget to function.
Perhaps the watchmakers of the world didnâ€™t see a big enough market for watches with the stem next to the â€œ9â€ for left-handers (although some manufacturers take a different view). I must admit that I never paid much attention to the wrist chosen by left-handers for watch wearing, other than thinking back to my mother who was a southpaw. As I recall, she wore her watch on her left wrist. Maybe she took it off to wind it; I just donâ€™t remember.
Now, Iâ€™ve noticed lots of people wearing their wristwatches on their right wrist. I doubt as many people did this when watches had to be wound, but I lack empirical data. Is this the case, because regular winding is not longer necessary? After all, one needs access to the watchâ€™s stem only twice per year to accommodate daylight saving time changes and, for watches with a date function, only five times per year to account for those months with fewer than thirty-one days.
Wearing a watch on oneâ€™s non-dominant hand seems natural to me, but that may be because Iâ€™ve never for one second thought about wearing it on my right wrist.
So, I ask these penetrating questions: On which wrist to you wear your wristwatch? Is your wrist of choice your dominant or non-dominant hand? Why is it your wrist of choice?
Isnâ€™t this easier on the cruller than thinking about politics and the potential death of the Republic on a nice Sunday afternoon?