Séxūal Michel Germain 1994

Bottle Design Pierre Dinand

See Prices

More

We may earn a commission when you buy from links on our site, including the eBay Partner Network and Amazon.

See Prices

4.3 / 10 11 Ratings

A perfume by Michel Germain for women, released in 1994. The scent is synthetic-floral. It is still in production.

More

We may earn a commission when you buy from links on our site, including the eBay Partner Network and Amazon.

Main accords

Synthetic

Floral

Powdery

Fresh

Sweet

Fragrance Pyramid

Top Notes

Bergamot

Clementine

Osmanthus

Heart Notes

Bulgarian rose

Egyptian jasmine

Gardenia

Base Notes

Cinnamon

Myrrh

Vanilla

Perfumer

Sophia Grojsman

Ratings

Scent

4.311 Ratings

Longevity

6.98 Ratings

Sillage

7.38 Ratings

Bottle

6.012 Ratings

Submitted by Lissy, last update on 02.04.2021.

Smells similar

What the fragrance is similar to

Reviews

3 in-depth fragrance descriptions

10/14/2013

5
Bottle 7.5
Sillage 5
Longevity 3
Scent

Sorceress
213 Reviews

Sorceress

Very helpful Review 3

Sex In The Funeral Home

I'll admit, the name is what made me pick up the box. And then, of course I looked up the notes. I always seem to enjoy Sophia Grojsman's perfumes, so I thought I'd give this one a try. Wrong pick-up for me.
Far, far too floral, as in my face floral that was relentless and would not dry down at all to anything else. I tried again, and still the same effect.
I enjoy various compositions, as long as they blend well together and eventually mute themselves to something pleasurable on me. (That's what perfume is about, yes, of course.) I was hoping for the cinnamon, the myrhh, perhaps the woods or even the vanilla to come through, but alas, none of it did.
It reminded me of a funeral home so back to the store it went. I'm just not that good with straight-up florals. I've been to too many wakes.

03/02/2012

4
Scent

Awesomeness
247 Reviews

Awesomeness

Helpful Review 1

Sexual, Yes. Wearable, No.

The white florals are relentless in "Sexual." It's very heady & heavy in a late-80s & early-90s way, yet it's very good quality. Not surprisingly, on me "Sexual" wears as a come-hither fragrance for someone who wants to be noticed and get noticed.

So, why is my rating a mediocre 40%? I'm certainly not "Asexual," but I would choose the antithesis of this fragrance any day of the week. "Sexual" is so not my thing. No offense to your tastes if you like this, but on me this is truly a white flower bomb. That's not a compliment.

Thankfully, I didn't blind buy this one based on price - currently $14.99 at Marshalls/TJ Maxx in Chicagoland area. I was very tempted on blind buys but waited to sample. I'd recommend you do the same - SAMPLE FIRST - regardless how inexpensive.

15 Aug 2010

01/29/2012

5
Bottle 7.5
Sillage 7.5
Longevity 5
Scent

Sherapop
1239 Reviews

Sherapop

Very helpful Review 2

Sophia Grojsman Double Dips

I have been curious about Michel Germain SEXUAL for quite some time and was faced with a choice at TJMAXX recently: a .5oz travel spray for $6.99, or a 3.4oz bottle for $14.99. I opted for the smaller format, well aware that, if perchance I fell in love, I could always return for the large economy size... So what did I find?

SEXUAL wafts unmistakeably of Calvin Klein ETERNITY, and anyone who has ever worn the latter on their skin can hardly fail to detect that Sophia Grosjman tatoo-like accord in this composition. I must say that I find it nothing short of amazing that a self-proclaimed "professional perfume reviewer" could have neglected to make note of the fact that Grojsman decided to incorporate the very same fingerprint accord in this less well-known and less widely marketed perfume.

ETERNITY was launched in 1988; SEXUAL in 1994. The marketing campaign for the former was ubiquitous (remember those Christy Turlington ads with her handsome husband and comely kids?)--and, remarkably enough, continues to this day, albeit with a new face. The marketing for SEXUAL? As far as I can tell, virtually nonexistent. If this perfume was ever promoted, it was to a completely different niche, it seems to me.

That said, I actually think that SEXUAL may be more wearable, all things considered, than ETERNITY, because the accord is quite a bit lighter here and dies down with the drydown. In ETERNITY, in contrast, the signature SG accord seems to grow louder and louder over time. (ETERNITY is one of the most aptly named perfumes in the history of perfume, given its quasi-infinite longevity!) The drydown of SEXUAL is darker and more serious than the Calvin Klein creation, and after awhile SEXUAL smells like a dirty rose on my skin.

Not bad, but I probably won't return to TJMAXX for the large bottle, because I overdosed on ETERNITY (perhaps not coincidentally ranked one of the most poisonous perfumes of all time, believe it or not), so I need to continue to avoid this accord for the foreseeable future. Anyone who likes (and can wear) ETERNITY is bound to like SEXUAL, notwithstanding its risible name.