Jim’s not talking politics this time. He’s talking 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 one’s dominant hand with easy access to the watch’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.
Which is where I started wearing mine: I am a northpaw, and for most of my poorly-timed life I wore a watch that required the occasional wind.
Now, I’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 watch’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.
These days, I wear an electronic. (Actually, it’s the same one I’ve worn since the middle 1980s.) It needs updating twice a year (DST on, DST off), and its date function fails only on the 29th of February. On the other hand, it keeps fairly lousy time, so I sync it manually, at least three times a week, to one of the two atomic timepieces I have at home. And once in a while, you may see it on my right wrist, as an effort to equalize the tan lines on either side.
There was one instance when I wore it, um, somewhere else, to the utter displeasure of the woman of the house, but you don’t want to know about that.