‘Wearables is a bit of a misnomer, because not many of them [the devices] are that wearable.’ — Sonny Vu, founder of Misfit Wearables.

Despite the prediction that wearable technology is set to leap from a $1.4 billion industry in 2013 to $19 billion in the next four years, the real problem that wearable technology must face is, ironically, making it wearable.

It seems an ingenuous and ill-educated strategy for technology companies to focus so specifically on marketing to men in hope that women may still buy their product, rather than catering for women consumers, too. In late 2013, Pew Research released a study identifying that women use every major social media channel more than men (except for one anomaly LinkedIn) and make more technology purchases than their male counterparts, so why are they being side-tracked when it comes to wearable technology? When you consider why people make the technology purchases they do, it is as much about being fashionable as it is to enhance their life. Why has Apple seen so much success? Because aesthetically it is as innovative as technically.

Currently, I am yet to find an item of wearable technology that I would be comfortable, as a 21-year-old female, wearing. When we buy something, we make the conscious decision that we are happy for these products to represent us, particularly when it comes to technology and fashion. What we wear and what we own say a lot about the person we want to portray ourselves as. Donning a freshly-launched piece of wearable technology, in the industries current state, says ‘I’m tech-savvy’ rather than ‘I’m fashionable’ and not until the two claims are synonymous will female consumers jump on board.

Rachel Arthur also recently gave an interesting perspective to this argument, looking at the female and male human bodies in terms of value to the wearable market:

‘Men are — broadly speaking — limited to their wrists and to eyewear. Most women on the other hand, will wear a watch, bracelet, ring, necklace, earrings and often multiples of all those at the same time. The female form, simply put, is far more valuable’.

The functionality and the look of wearable technology should have the same requirement — to be discrete. If I am wearing a tech-infused bracelet, I do not want to draw attention to this as much as I do not want a client to know I have just received an email via the bracelet. As the technology inside these budding devices is advancing, the design aspect remains sluggish. Wearable technology has to disappear into everyday objects for it to not present itself, or its wearer, as too forthcoming and blatant about their purchase and technology habits.

A foreseeable future of wearable technology must evolve and purpose. As more and more brands use digital for digital’s sake, particularly on social media, tech companies need to address their outlook on not making a wearable product for the sake of it. The company that wins the race in wearable technology is one that creates a meaningful product that can blend into our everyday lives and objects without being overly intrusive — and when I say our, I mean both men and women.