Which masculine scents can be worn by a woman?

Dlane1953:
American men have less leeway than women when it comes to fragrance choices--unless the male in question is openly gay, and then all bets are off because gay males have the leeway that straight men lack; they can wear what they please because they don't fit the stereotypes anyway.

Apicius:
Sherapop, the thought with the silage is interesting.

The olfactory is not very far away from the gustatory sense. Let us look at how gender is treated in food and compare it to perfumery.

Usually, we are not aware that gender is reflected by food, but it is! Somehow, I have the impression that light, delicate, tender or sweet food is rather aimed at women - at least by the industry and their ad campaigns - whereas stronger, more robust food is aimed at men. For instance, there is a food magazine in Germany that targets an exclusively male audience, and its title is 'Beef'. - Chocolate for ladies is being advertised as very light, maybe filled with some yoghurt cream, whereas chocolate for men must not be too sweet at all: it has to be bitter and pitch dark (In Germany, we have such a product named “Herrenschokolade”!). And you have to admit – eating a cone of raspberry ice cream usually doesn't look very butch.

Maybe you can say that sweet / light/ tender is considered to be feminine, and salty / strong / robust can be regarded as masculine.

Now – who wants sushi, light salads and sweets all day? I can easily drop the sweets for savory or salty food, but I would loose my appetite very soon if I'd had to eat nothing but sweets.

Back to perfumery: It is OK to wear a feminine white musk and vanilla scent (= yoghurt) as a dessert, but not all day. However – white musk is quite sticky and will not leave you so soon. It can be the same with amiable flowery fragrances that have some longevity but are of average quality. After having them around for some hours you desperately want a matie herring or a savoury pickled cucumber.

This is IMHO the main reason why men hardly wear ladies' fragrances – next to being afraid of cross-dressing. Many unisex and male fragrances suit the olfactory sense better in the long run than an average feminine floriental or a sweetish gourmand. I disagree with Greysolon: it is not that men have fewer fragrance options, and that cultural restraints prevent them to buy Chanel No.5 – they simply do not want to wear the feminine fragrances (including me). To create a really grand feminine fragrance that overcomes all these obstacles must be the highest level of perfumery, and we should look out for any of those exceptions.

But there is more to it: Overapplying a floral-fruity feminine scent it riskier than doing the same with a gent's perfume – people might comment on it as 'Nuttendiesel'. (I leave the translation to you) Women who overapply a ladies' scent are treated by far less respectful than men who do the same with their gent's cologne. Back to Sherapop's question: I think, feminine scents do not generally have more silage, but they might be more difficult to use.

Overapplying a feminine scent or wearing a strong ladies' fragrance, of course, can emphasize the wearers femininity – up to the point where, due to such 'vulgarity', some other women get annoyed and many men get afraid. We all know that after several decades of women's lib offensive, strong femininity is still not really accepted in most of our societies. (I always have to grin if I see a really handsome guy being accompanied by an ugly duckling who lacks make-up and perfume).

This has influences on the concept of lightness and / or softness in perfumes. As women have good reason to fear insults by wearing an offensive perfume, lightness and softness have become linked to ladies' fragrances as part of the concept of femininity. Nevertheless, it sometimes appears to me as an evasive movement similar to the evasion into unisex and masculine scents.

I want people to have a positive attitude towards their own gender, and I want them to express that by the perfumes they wear. This is why I want women to wear Vivienne Westwoods "Anglomania" rather than Martin Margielas "(untitled)". Of course, it is OK and necessary to have something discreet an unoffensive in the wardrobe as well. But I despise people like Serge Lutens who I suppose are very well aware of this context but still make their profit by creating olfactory burkas. They stand on the other side of the barricade. Wearing a certain kind of perfume does have political aspects.

So, women wearing gent's colognes – is that evasion from one's own femininity or just from overly sweet and soft perfumes?

Apicius:
there are horrible fragrances on both sides.
My idea of a really grand ladies fragrance would include opulent florals, but balanced maybe by a tart vetiver/musk/sandalwood base note. Maybe some powdery orris as well. It might not be more difficult to produce such a perfume than a decent men's fragrance, but maybe, such a concept is a bit outdated at the moment.

I do not have a big overview on ladies' fragrances, but I very much like
perfumes like "Ma Griffe",

Sherapop:

Perhaps the problem is that women's perfumes tend to have bigger sillage? So it's much more obvious when a man wears a "feminine" fragrance than when a woman wears a "masculine" fragrance.

What do you think?
:

Greysolon:
While projection and sillage might have a role in answering the question it doesn't get to the core issue which is much deeper and more emotional.

When men express a perceived feminine quality it's often viewed as weakness and subject to ridicule and derision, if not outright hostility. Think of how often you see men mimic and ridicule effeminate qualities in other men. Also, as I said in my previous post, men have limited fashion choices based on uniforms and all the traditional social and moral roles that entails. Over the course of the 20th century that came to include fragrances, too. So if you're "out of uniform" fragrance-wise, especially in a way that's considered traditionally feminine, there will be people offended by your violation of the social contract.

However, we're much more tolerant of women expressing masculine qualities through fashion: shoulder pads, bomber jackets, Doc Marten boots... I really don't think anyone would care, even if they noticed, if a woman wears a masculine fragrance. It's that expression of the masculine in fragrance that's given us Jicky, Cuir de Russie and Sycamore.

So, once again, women are more evolved than us hairy, knuckle draggers. I'm giving my wife a bottle of Yatagan for Mother's Day

Sherapop:

Of course, analogous codes are supposed to be followed by women as well. For example, "Women are to be seen, not heard." Maybe women can wear whatever they like, so long as they focus on their appearance and keep their mouths shut?

Dlane1953:
Elixer de Melveilles is a wonderful fougere fragrance that I think would be wonderful on most women in general. I have a sample and I think it's spectacular. Definately worth a try. (Do not confuse with Eau de Melveilles, they are very different frags.)

Apicius:
Sherapop, the thought with the silage is interesting.

The olfactory is not very far away from the gustatory sense. Let us look at how gender is treated in food and compare it to perfumery.

Usually, we are not aware that gender is reflected by food, but it is! Somehow, I have the impression that light, delicate, tender or sweet food is rather aimed at women - at least by the industry and their ad campaigns - whereas stronger, more robust food is aimed at men. For instance, there is a food magazine in Germany that targets an exclusively male audience, and its title is 'Beef'. - Chocolate for ladies is being advertised as very light, maybe filled with some yoghurt cream, whereas chocolate for men must not be too sweet at all: it has to be bitter and pitch dark (In Germany, we have such a product named “Herrenschokolade”!). And you have to admit – eating a cone of raspberry ice cream usually doesn't look very butch.

Maybe you can say that sweet / light/ tender is considered to be feminine, and salty / strong / robust can be regarded as masculine.

Now – who wants sushi, light salads and sweets all day? I can easily drop the sweets for savory or salty food, but I would loose my appetite very soon if I'd had to eat nothing but sweets.

Back to perfumery: It is OK to wear a feminine white musk and vanilla scent (= yoghurt) as a dessert, but not all day. However – white musk is quite sticky and will not leave you so soon. It can be the same with amiable flowery fragrances that have some longevity but are of average quality. After having them around for some hours you desperately want a matie herring or a savoury pickled cucumber.

This is IMHO the main reason why men hardly wear ladies' fragrances – next to being afraid of cross-dressing. Many unisex and male fragrances suit the olfactory sense better in the long run than an average feminine floriental or a sweetish gourmand. I disagree with Greysolon: it is not that men have fewer fragrance options, and that cultural restraints prevent them to buy Chanel No.5 – they simply do not want to wear the feminine fragrances (including me). To create a really grand feminine fragrance that overcomes all these obstacles must be the highest level of perfumery, and we should look out for any of those exceptions.

But there is more to it: Overapplying a floral-fruity feminine scent it riskier than doing the same with a gent's perfume – people might comment on it as 'Nuttendiesel'. (I leave the translation to you) Women who overapply a ladies' scent are treated by far less respectful than men who do the same with their gent's cologne. Back to Sherapop's question: I think, feminine scents do not generally have more silage, but they might be more difficult to use.

Overapplying a feminine scent or wearing a strong ladies' fragrance, of course, can emphasize the wearers femininity – up to the point where, due to such 'vulgarity', some other women get annoyed and many men get afraid. We all know that after several decades of women's lib offensive, strong femininity is still not really accepted in most of our societies. (I always have to grin if I see a really handsome guy being accompanied by an ugly duckling who lacks make-up and perfume).

This has influences on the concept of lightness and / or softness in perfumes. As women have good reason to fear insults by wearing an offensive perfume, lightness and softness have become linked to ladies' fragrances as part of the concept of femininity. Nevertheless, it sometimes appears to me as an evasive movement similar to the evasion into unisex and masculine scents.

I want people to have a positive attitude towards their own gender, and I want them to express that by the perfumes they wear. This is why I want women to wear Vivienne Westwoods "Anglomania" rather than Martin Margielas "(untitled)". Of course, it is OK and necessary to have something discreet an unoffensive in the wardrobe as well. But I despise people like Serge Lutens who I suppose are very well aware of this context but still make their profit by creating olfactory burkas. They stand on the other side of the barricade. Wearing a certain kind of perfume does have political aspects.

So, women wearing gent's colognes – is that evasion from one's own femininity or just from overly sweet and soft perfumes?

Guusje:
To me male/female is only marketing.
Wear what you want I my motto

I want a bottle of "Carthusia Uomo"

DieNase:
And men overapplying le male are not treated any better than women wearing Nuttendiesel. Some cheap men's aftershaves heavily applied are able to clear complete train compartments.