Why put gender on it?

Why even slap a gender on a perfume bottle? Pure marketing. They figured out that splitting scents into “for him” and “for her” boosts sales, so they ran with it. Money talks.

The whole thing is an illusion, kind of hilarious if you think about it. Gender is made up. The perfume pyramid is made up: there are hundreds of materials in a formula, but they list like 5–15 “notes” just to make it sound appealing. The price game is just as fake. Sure, some ingredients are pricey, but most designer and niche scents cost under ten bucks a bottle to produce.

It’s all smoke and mirrors. Trust your nose. If it smells good to you, wear it. Forget gender, notes, ingredient lists, “natural” vs “synthetic,” or “expensive” vs “cheap.” It’s not always what it seems.

And while I get it, it’s all marketing blah blah blah. But when a perfume is marketed as feminine and I don’t like it on myself, I do feel bad to rate it poorly.

Another thing I’d like to bring up. And that doesn’t only apply to perfume but also to clothing, is that women can more easily pull of a male-marketed product than vice versa. Enjoy that.

I really don`t care about the gender label on fragrances, but I rather enjoy having the masculine/feminine direction because most people can understand and relate to it. It`s just common sense, silly or offensive as it might seem to some. As far as what someone chooses to wear, that`s their own business and we should all be respectful of people`s personal choices. Perfume labeling is not an ideological battle. No one`s rights are violated or promoted in any way. 

There are other things that actually do have a real impact in the world of cosmetics, such as labeling some cosmetic products masculine or feminine and charging inflated prices for one category of virtually the same product. For example, shaving cream or razor blades sold as "feminine" are almost twice as much as those for men, and not sure why. 

I was excessively antagonistic and should stop posting at 7AM. But my point stands, so let me try to rewrite my last response. You have nitpicked an easily debatable figure of speech. Okay. I could've worded that better. Would you like to address my actual argument?

Or at least provide the data to back up your claim that the Old Spice After Shave was initially marketed towards women and flopped?

As far as I'm aware, Old Spice's first fragrance was Early American Old Spice that came out a year earlier – in 1937. It was marketed towards women, sold out and achieved enough of a success for the company to be able to launch a campaign targeted towards men a year later. They changed the formula a bit to try and appeal to men, but people liked the women's version better. So it was put into pretty white bottles with a cool picture of a sailing ship for manly men. And sold like hot cakes.

Sure, men were more enthusiastic about the new product. But not because it turned out to be inherently manly or anything – they just didn't have as many options to choose from at the time. There were more than 4000 perfumes (that are listed in Parfumo database) marketed towards women that came out before 1938. There were barely 200 directed at men. Old Spice tried to put out more men's fragrances through the years, but none reached anywhere near the success of the original. Early American has stayed in production until the 60s, and was eventually phased out as the market moved on.

This is a very different historical picture than "they marketed aftershave to women and it didn't sell".

Perfume is no different. Labeling a perfume Men's or Women's, does not

mean the liquid or the bottle itself is a Man or Woman (which I've too

often seen the arguments for). It's a guide, that helps a buyer gain an

understanding of - before even trying it - what the liquid might smell

like, or the associations that could be linked with it. It is not

prescriptive. The labels don't read: Men's - Women Are NOT Allowed to

Purchase This. And: Women's - Men Are NOT Allowed to Purchase This.

Again, it's a way to give a sense of the type of accords that could be

detected, and the associations that might be had through them. 

This is helpful to those who don't have alot of knowledge on

perfume, or what scents they like and don't like. It can also help those

who just don't have the time or interest in researching, chatting,

joining forums, reading reviews, to be able to - at a glance - have a

starting point, and then branch out if they wish.

Having categories doesn't limit options. They don't stop anyone from

using anything they like from any other category. Populations in general

do have certain associations with scents, tastes, textures, with many

aspects of life. That's not wrong. In this case, perfumery gives a

generalized context of what associations might be had in a given scent,

and further context, through a list of scent notes, of what could be

expected from a given scent. It's not wrong. It's not bad. It's not

harmful. It does help the consumers that need it, and I'd gather that

more consumers than not need it.

There's a wide range to how people choose to engage or not engage with these categorizations. 

The categorizations aren't limiting, wrong, or bad. Neither are the ways in which people choose to use them or not use them.

The point I was trying to make.

Couldn't agree more. 👍

This is going to be a bit off topic, however I feel I need to comment this, because this is a very common argument that really triggers me, sorry. 😅

Yes, historically perfumes were luxury items, in fact historically perfumes didn't address gender but they did address class, only upper class people could afford them. And thank god it's not like that anymore. 5 euros body spray hardly is a luxury item.

What comes to the need, well yeah, what do people need to live? Water, food and sleep basically. Everything else is a luxury item, right? So I could say, for example, that plates, forks and knives are luxury items, nobody needs them so why people buy them? They could save their money and eat with their hands. Same with beds and pillows, we don't need them, why don't we just sleep on the ground in the middle of the forest, would save money not to own stupid luxury items. This is how it feels to me when someone says "nobody needs fragrance".

No, I don't need fragrance in order to survive. If the end of the world comes or I end up in the middle of a war zone, I will survive without perfume of course. I pray that in the future no one would have to live like that, it's absolutely awful and not humane.

However, in current normal circumstances where I'm thankful to live in, yes, I do need perfume to be comfortable. I need fragrances to cope with my social anxiety, I need fragrances to escape my chronic pain, I need fragrances to ease my depression, I need fragrances to do olfactory stimming as I'm neurodivergent, I need fragrances for my personal well-being. If some people don't think that's important, well I can tell them that forks and knives and pillows aren't important either, why would you use such unnecessary luxury items. 🤷

I personally can't understand why yoga or playing football or watching someone playing tennis in TV would be fun either because I hate things like that, however I do understand that for someone else they might be coping mechanisms and important for their well-being so wouldn't even cross my mind to question why they're needing such luxury.

This thread is starting to feel a bit like Don Quijote and his windmills or a soapbox for activists. 🙃I thought Parfumo was supposed to be FREE of ALL POLITICS. Can we just get back to talking about perfumes, please? Notes, silage, the BEAUTY of what they evoke for us.  

I reread Parfumo community rules and found nothing in there about the site being "free of all politics". If there is a rule of that sort, please do point me to it. But no place in human society is free of all politics.

The fact that we separate smells by gender is politics. The fact that consultants always try to shuffle me back into women's section is politics. The fact that my partner is afraid to wear L'Eau d'Issey Eau de Toilette outside of the house even though it is really beautiful on him – is also politics.

I love perfumes, so I am talking about them. I do find beauty in their notes and sillage, but also in their data and history. If pointing out misuse of perfume data and disinformation regarding perfume history makes me an activist – then I suppose I am an activist. Why is that a bad thing? Just because you personally don't care for it?

🙄Oh dear Lord! 😂 

For what it's worth, this forum is so quiet that I appreciate  any and all topics haha

I think putting a label like male/female/unisex is mostly for marketing, and to communicate the perfume is somewhat familiar to most customers, if that makes sense. And what's familiar but new probably sells. Like this is male and what you think a male scent perfume should be is going to be the starting point. However surprising or playful the perfume wants to be with those expectations is up to the perfumer and the brand, who may or may not care to do something like that like tongue in cheek. 

but when those gender labels becomes exclusionary in perfume like you're describing it stops being fun I think. I even catch myself sometimes being unwilling to try traditionally masculine perfumes and I think that's such a bummer because there's obviously art there that I  could love, and a label meant to communicate a general "vibe" (and even that is dependant on biases and what sort of scents you associate with what based on culture possibly and experience) shouldn't make me assume that I wouldn't like it just because of my gender... that's silly.

acknowledging these weird associations (like lavender being traditionally masculine which always makes me roll my eyes) and maybe then pushing ourselves to challenge those associations is not a bad thing at all, or to want to discuss the broader implications of those same associations. I think that could be fun but it seems that people don't even agree that the labels might be limiting 🤷🏻‍♀️ personally i think the gender binary shouldn't be as ingrained but a lot of people are comfortable in it unfortunately.

anyway sorry for my convoluted message. Hope that made some sense haha. I should give Prada Homme a proper try.

It's always the women on these threads who want to get rid of the idea of gender in perfumery and the guys who defend it, and it's easy to see why: when women wear men's clothing, they are seen as just a bit tomboyish; if a man wears women's clothing, he is a full-fledged transvestite in a lot of men's (and women's) minds. It's the same thing with perfume. If a man wears perfume that is traditionally, culturally, etc. seen as women's perfume, other men, and even some women, will assume he is sending some kind of message, that he is gay, effeminate, etc. When women wear men's fragrance, it's just cool with everyone and no one assumes they are trying to make a statement.

Now we can analyze why this is until the cows come home, whether it is the result of marketing 100 years ago, or political, or just cultural, but it doesn't make much difference. Most men are uncomfortable wearing sweet, fruity, or floral scents, especially if those scents are built on a traditional women's perfume DNA. This is not necessarily a conscious decision they're making but built upon years upon years of conditioning, with their grandmas, moms, wives, daughters, female friends, wearing perfumes with a certain combination of notes and men not wanting to smell like that not only because they will be judged by others, but because it is uncomfortable for us to smell that way. It just doesn't feel natural. An analogy would be like major and minor keys in music. There's nothing intrinsically sad about slow tempos or the minor key or intrinsically happy about the major key but it would feel unnatural to play Barber's Adagio for Strings at a happy occasion like a wedding, or Eine Kleine Nachtmusik at a funeral (unless that was the deceased's favorite piece or something).

I like floral notes done in a light playful way. I just don't like them on myself. I'm wearing Eau de Magnolia today, and I have no qualms about the scent. It's just not me. I'd love to smell it on a woman. It would just feel more natural. "Natural" in the sense that there is some natural law or science or morality that requires women to smell like flowers? Not at all, but what has happened is that my whole life I've been conditioned by society to feel this way. I can't just "decide" that I'm going to enjoy smelling like that from now on, no matter how much it's drilled into me that all fragrance is unisex. Even if I force myself and rotate between wearing J'adore Eau de Parfum, Delina Eau de Parfum, and Coco Mademoiselle Eau de Parfum every day for a year, it's still going to feel wrong to me, like it's not my own smell emanating from my own body.

I think multiple things can be true at once. On one hand, everyone loves the smells of christmas trees and fresh baked cookies. 

At the same time, I think a lot of us, as humans, have grown up associating certain smells with often-gendered rites of passage. For example, a lot of perfumes that have been marketed to men smell like “spicy fresh” aftershave. Even if men today are more adventurous (and right on!), they likely still grew up with fathers, uncles, and grandfathers who wore Old Spice everyday. And then if you are a guy,you very likely grew up with bonding activities like going to the barber shop or having your first shave with your dad. Smell is a huge part of those memories.

I know growing up as a kid in the 2000’s and a teen in the 2010’s, perfumes like Pink Sugar, Bombshell, Hypnotic and Poison were all over the mall. I still remember girly-girl older cousin wore Pink Sugar to a family Christmas Party and my friend’s older sister having Fantasy on her dresser. I think because of my childhood, I personally think of fruitchoulis, soft florals, and gourmands as stereotypical “pretty girl” scents. 

But it’s funny, because many of the perfumes marketed to women in the 1980’s and earlier seem to be a world of difference! Paloma Picasso, The original Poison, White Diamonds, Chanel no. 5, Shalimar! If you’re used to perfumes smelling like Poison Girl, those are going to be real shockers! So, even the idea of a “feminine” perfume is a little complicated on its own! After all, I suspect a woman who was a kid in the 1960’s or 1980’s would have a completely different idea of a stereotypical “pretty girl” scent from me, and that’s okay. 

Interestingly enough, traditionally “masculine” scents were often a rite of passage for lesbian and bi women (including myself!)

I can’t speak for queer women of all generations and nations, but I remember that general aftershave/axe body spray/old spice smell was something that was cool to wear if you were a woman. It was kind of like a way of showing your pride. (It also helps that I came out at 18 and went to a historically women’s college in a town that had a VERY big lesbian population).

I think if you grew up not feeling attractive or feeling like there’s something “wrong” with you, then perfume’s kind of a nice way to say “actually, yes, I am attractive. I am one of the beautiful ones”. Scent can be a big part of people’s “second puberty” (aka the time in their life when they really start to know who they are). As you can imagine, gender and sexuality can also be key to someone understanding and appreciating themselves.

I agree with all the people that say the gendering of everything is ridiculous and also malleable, and I also don’t blame people if they feel more comfortable with certain scent profiles.
Ultimately, nothing exists in a vacuum and you like what you like. Who am I to judge.

Now I must admit that, while I understand that this part of the post was meant to be just a harmless generalization, it really got me quite upset. Why? I am the woman who has been constantly bullied more than half of her life being too "manly" and doing things that are completely "wrong" for my gender. Starting from my childhood how I played with "wrong" toys, continuing to my teenage when I wore "wrong" clothes and listened to "wrong" music and watched "wrong" movies/TV-series and further continuing in my adulthood constantly hearing verbal abuse from my ex and his friends that I'm wearing "wrong" fragrances, or that I'm not wearing makeup and being manly as all people in my gender should have makeup on, not shaving often enough as my hair growth is sooooo unfeminine etc. being not feminine enough in any way. I have actually even heard from perfume and clothes SAs how what I'm wearing is wrong and how I'm looking for things from the wrong side of the store. I have heard from my co-workers how me not wearing makeup or right gender clothes is unprofessional and how in parties I'm offensive to everybody because all women should really have makeup on in all parties. No one ever said I was cool or just a little bit tomboyish. The only thing I have heard is I'm not welcome to be who I am because it seems completely wrong to my gender. I have just chosen not to care but that doesn't mean that those words never hurt me. Yes they did, sometimes I still hear them in my head almost every day. Still, I chose to fight. I chose to stand for everybody who want to be themselves and show that the bullies won't pull me down, I will just continue to choose my own thing and show a living example to everybody else too that anyone can do this despite the horrible bullying. And now I'm hearing none of this ever actually could have happened to me because it's always only men who experience bullying of being "feminine" and I'm just fighting because I'm a woman and it's easy for me? Oh lord indeed. SMH.

Just wanna throw this out there: Parfumo should really stay politics-free. We're all here because we love fragrance ❤️, not to argue about worldviews. Plenty of other places online for that.

At the end of the day, who cares what the label says? Perfume's meant to be enjoyed... and anyone should wear whatever they love. That's the whole magic of it.

So pleeease 🙏 - let's keep this space about scents, bottles, and the joy they bring us.

I definitely didn't intend to make anyone feel not heard or not seen, and you're right; my generalization was stupid when it came to the woman's perspective, since I have very little experience with that (mostly through my wife, who teaches me every day), which is not an excuse.

My point was mainly that a significant part of straight men's decision-making is based on machismo and homophobia, since it has been drilled into our heads that we cannot expose our effeminate side in public, and that it is seen as a sign of weakness.

Speaking strictly about fragrance, I haven't directly been called out for wearing something effeminate (mainly because I'm admittedly not adventurous in that way), but I've been shooed away from the "women's" scent section on more than one occasion (ain't my fault that Sephora keeps all the Kilians and Tom Fords on that side!), and I've had a friend come up to me, who knows I'm a fraghead, and ask about another guy, "isn't he wearing women's perfume?" in a derogatory way, who I then had to educate that fragrance doesn't really have gender, and that most fragrances are unisex now anyway. If he's comfortable voicing that opinion, who knows what's going on in other guys' heads when they come across something they deem effeminate, or what is being talked about behind my own back? Definitely not trying to directly compare experiences, but just saying there's a reason men avoid certain scents.

Thank you folks for sharing your opinions. I do respect all the answers and it's beautiful to talk about perfume regardless gender in it. 

I would not sum up the discussion, I will let you guys to continue. I mean isn't amusing to see why marketing have to differentiate the label on a product that all people (regardless social status, gender, age and so many more) can actually wear it? 

Nevertheless, I would like to extend a question "If you entered the perfume industry, how would you market and sell fragrances—without using any gender labels (including 'unisex')—to highlight their universal appeal and get customers to focus purely on the scent and emotion?"

Personally, I'm quite partial to the way Comme des Garçons markets theirs. Which is to say – eh, not at all, really... Their website is simpler than my first attempts at making a webpage with HTML in 2007, and their perfume descriptions are a list of notes and whatever quick statement they wanted to add. But that's not a strategy one can adhere to without being backed by a presence as large and iconic as that of Rei Kawakubo. 

Serge Lutens is another lovable example of "scent and emotion" type of marketing, though design-wise it stands on the opposite end of the spectrum from CdG. 

I only tested 250+ different fragrances so far, so I'm still far from any serious thoughts about entering the industry. But looking at it from my current perspective – I suppose I'd take a similar approach as the houses above. A short list of prominent notes; a quick description of the vibe I was trying to catch and seal within that bottle. A minimalist bottle design that allows the scent to speak for itself. Separation of perfumes based on categories they fall into on the fragrance wheel, or by collections of different aspects of one specific vision/idea. 

But at the moment I'm happy to be on the, uh, perfumee side of things. I just wish it was a more equal and welcoming playing ground for everybody.