To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Armitage – :
When did this become a woman’s perfume? I remember when it first came out it was marketed to men and sold at the men’s counter. I still have a small amount of the original left from then. I very nice fragrance i enjoyed a lot. A little hard to discuss when asked what i had on but a good fragrance. I’ll have to go smell it again but i recall it being an oriental spicy fragrance not a floral.
Muchka – :
Ignore the name. I detest the name. This is a candied, spicy rose with a soapy heart. Just wonderful.
If you remember the Teen Spirit shampoo, conditioner, and deodorant from the nineties with the scent “Romantic Rose,” well this is a dead ringer. It took me forever to figure that out; I have worn this many times in the last few months and always felt that I had smelled it long ago. Yet I could not quite recall what it reminded me of. It’s like Romantic Rose with just the tiniest whiff of Tresor.
So out of style – just wonderful! Rose with improvements.
EDIT: this is just so good. Hate the name, love the scent. One of the best roses ever. Should have been named “Romantic.”
plurnexamnner – :
This is my 2nd Sophia Grojsman perfume after Ex Cla Mation.
Sexual is a spicy and sultry Oriental bomb Peppery, spicy, dark, far from fresh. It starts off with sweet fruit scents of clementine, citrus, and apricot. It’s delicious as it starts. Cinnamon and vanilla give it a sweetness and spiciness that is to die for. The fruity floral vibe is there but it doesn’t stay that way. The flowers in this fragrance are a bouquet of honeysuckle rose and gardenia.
But because of the deep base filled with incense myrrh and sandalwood, the classic Oriental notes, the flowers turn smokier and darker. There is an incense and a mysterious sexiness to this scent. It makes me feel like wearing a dark trench coat and nothing underneath and showing up at a stranger’s door.
If you like smoky florals like L’Agent by Agent Provocateur this is more or less like that except it has that typical Sophia G opening of fruit. Feminine but unisex, gorgeous, full bodied, dark, exotic and sexy.
Like it’s name suggests it IS sexual. It’s a fragrance to seduce the nose of your lover. But put only a little bit of it on. It’s really more of the foreplay scent. The scent will draw him in and get him interested and want to take you but by the time you’re nude in bed, the scent should not be in his mouth LOL
Love it. So sexy.
mila0883 – :
The bottle is very old timey and attractive enough for my collection so I bought it blindly, ignoring the fact that this is an Oriental fragrance. The name SEXUAL is misleading. Not a sex bomb or a pheromone. I have only a little bit of experience wearing Orientals but I’m ok with some of them. I don’t think this wears like an Oriental. It’s a spicy floral, with honeysuckle, apricot nectar, neroli, floral notes and myrrh. It was hard for me to take it in at first. The scent that opens this fragrance is a sweet clementine and apricot along with a bit of nectar, but it doesn’t stay sweet for too long. The honeysuckle scent embraces the osmanthus, water lily, gardenia, and jasmine. The white florals appear first and the jasmine stands out. The rose note takes over as the fragrance begins to enter it’s final phase the dry down. Then it’s purely rose, myrrh and sandalwood. This part is unisex and more Oriental than the opening which was a typical Sophia Grojsman apricot-fruit opening and floral heart. The sandalwood is lovely and it’s layered with spices of cinnamon and the tiniest bit of incense courtesy of myrrh. The myrrh is all that is left at the end, feels like incense or powder. It’s gorgeous. It’s an evening cologne, a bit on the masculine side, but wearable for women who enjoy floral Orientals. It’s dark, not fresh, it’s not sexual but it does conjure up images of an ancient Chinese Empress taking a scented bath. I suppose that can be “sexy”. This is very different from any other perfume I have and I love it but I can’t wear it too often. This is a night time perfume to wear in the winter time and with formal evening wear. I’ll wear this when I perform at wedding and private parties. Thank God I have so many perfumes to choose from. Thanks once again Sophia Grojsman! That woman made her living only creating perfumes! How I envy her!
Philipeskt85 – :
Well I feel kinda sexy wearing this! It’s spicy, flowery, I like the honeysuckle, cinammon and I think it’s the myrhh that gives it that little bit of something different, sweet radiating it’s way up with my body warmth to linger in my nose. I had to go buy another bottle not knowing when I would come across this again (have two). It lasts nicely on me also, my skin being the type to gobble up fragrances; actually I have three Michel Germains – this, Fresh for women and Sexual Sugar Daddy! (love this on me, the spicy warmth of this mens’ frag is so yummy) and all three last nicely. So I grab them when I see them as most seem to be discontinued (for those of you who are Canadian, Shoppers Drug Mart will always price them at $19.99 which is a good deal.
Kpuk – :
I just bought this today – I don’t smell anything sexual about, but it is a spring day, at least to my nose. It smells clean, fresh, and light, I’ve had it on for about 3 hours.
папапаша – :
The nose behind this perfume is Sophia Grojsman, and that’s what made me blind buy it. I must confess I’m not happy with the purchase!
The chemical, detergent-like smell make my nostrils tickle. Nothing sexual, believe me 🙂 It does have similarities to Eternity, but “thanks” to Sexual i started to dislike Eternity too. In order to stop my constant sneezing had to return it, sorry!
kilimb – :
What a strange name for an ultra-clean perfume that basically just smells like rose scented hotel soap…
komogorov62 – :
Blind-bought this one at TJMaxx as I knew it was a Grojsman composition and was curious… All-in-all, I like it.
This fragrance has distinct phases that it transitions through, and honestly it can smell like entirely-different perfumes at each stage: phase 1) upon spraying, there is a blast of fizzy, rose-dominant floral-aldehyde blend (which might put off younger perfumistas as it lends a “vintage” feel of pre-’90’s scents); these calm nicely after 30 minutes or so, bringing it to phase 2) which I don’t like so much. A plastic/vinyl-like odor is revealed in the lower top/high heart. I believe it is part of one of the floral-notes… not diffused as well as I’d like. I’ve smelt this same note in Moschino’s ‘Light Clouds’ as well… and decide to endure it until it fades. Thankfully, here it disappears by the 1 to 1.5 hour mark… and (phase 3) leaves a gorgeously-balanced fragrance of white florals, subtle fruits, warm resins and vanilla’d woods… it borders on “sweet” without being cloying in the least. This structure holds together and releases slowly over the next few hours- and is the time during which this perfume is assuredly in its glory- eventually becoming a (phase 4) nice skin scent of the lovely base at about the 6-7-hour mark, trailing off after that…
Not my favorite of Grojsman’s work (perhaps the budget for this project wasn’t high-enough to achieve her usual perfection?), but I am pleased with the hours of enjoyment I get from it. To me, it screams “springtime”, but I know that I’m in the minority with that connection.
swen – :
It’s an ok soft musky/spicy scent. But there is something odd about it that turns me off. Other than that, it’s nothing too special.
LudmilaOLV – :
I do not care for it. Starts off nasty and cloying, then settles into no smell at all. I don’t find it sexy at all, despite the name. Which would be fine if it actually came off as a nice oriental or floral, but it just comes as nasty. Smells like cheap dollar store perfume, actually I have smelled dollar store perfume that smells way better than this. Going to give away. Of course, body chemistry and results will vary, but I just don’t see anything positive about it.
andaces26 – :
I’m just not into florals, And florientals are just too strong and cloying. It’s so old fashioned like an old lady from the 1990’s… This was a blind buy from ROSS. I got excited when I saw the box, i thought it was Sexual Sugar. One of my FAVorites that I would douse myself in (among MANY others) when I worked Fragrance at Macy’s.. Hea-ven! But Anyways, I have a love/hate relationship with this because when it dry’s down it relaxes into something old fashioned but in a very rich and classy way. It reminds me of when I’d go to a nice department store as a kid and the place smelled like expensive new clothes, fancy perfume and air conditioned coolness. I’m currently using this to perfume my closet 🙂
elektronik – :
Purchased a small spray EDP for $6 from Tj Maxx. This reminds me a lot of YSL’s Paris which was also composed by Sophia Grojsman. But where Paris opens as a big thick almost buttery floral, underscored with woods and musks and warm amber to make it rich. Sexual is a big screechy floral on me that just smells a little too synthetic and chemical for me to get past. Oh, and there’s absolutely nothing “sexual” about it. I’m glad it was a cheap blind buy.
fefowuld – :
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.
G-UNIT – :
I just purchased this today and am now wearing it (a blind purchase, as I had heard of it before). Turin’s review gave this a 3 star – but I think it is perhaps a 4. The top note was indeed somewhat harsh, almost pungent, but 1/2 later it is now a soft sophisticated classy floral note – great for evening. So far I am liking it. I am very fond of Rose notes – and I can smell it here. Yes very sensual bottle. The name is a little odd… but otherwise I am happy with my purchase so far at least!
alkos2010 – :
i just wonder why this perfume is called “sexual” is there a suposed aphrodisiac effect in it ?
Gusarwyglm – :
I finally got a whiff of this in body lotion form. It’s a pleasant classic, warm floral that brings to mind the smell of generic cold creams, face lotions, and original rose scented Ban roll-on deodorant.
Update: The fragrance really does smell like Eternity.
Lachenko – :
I bought a tester today–and clearly overpaid, if not terribly–but I must say, I really, really like it. On my skin the honeysuckle, freesia, and myrrh rise together. They may seem like an odd combination, but somehow it works. The honeysuckle and freesia give that deep, tangy sweetness, while the myrrh provides a kind of salty breeze to lift and fan the florals.
It doesn’t smell cheap to me, not that I’m a great nose, because I’m not. I do agree that it smells very much like Sun Moon Stars, but I like this better. Sun Moon Stars seems like the hippie sister of Sexual, ironically, a little more uninhibited than the not-so-aptly named Sexual.
Since Sophia Grojsman composed both Sexual and SMS, and Eternity to which it’s also been compared but I haven’t smelled, it’s not surprising that there are similarities. Every artist has her own palette.
I think it’s wonderful that lovely perfumes like these can be had for a song. But it’s an individual thing. Volupte is another one of hers that I love, and is also inexpensive. Her perfumes help me feel creative, fun, and sweet. Many are cheap and cheerful, as the English say.
Check out her compositions by clicking on her name in the fragrance description. Her open, warm expression and that cute wrap in her hair say it all. She seems likeable and approachable.
On the other hand, as far as designer fragrances go, the Chanel line–no doubt more upper-crusty and far more expensive–always make me feel severe and underfed, much like the Mistress herself.
Perfume is so personal!
w203 – :
Sexual- not really aptly named. I didn’t find anything sexy about it, but it was a nice oriental floral for day to day wear. More flowery than anything, but with a creamy slightly spicy undertone. There was always something just slightly out of balance with it, but I enjoyed the overall scent enough to wear it frequently. Nice for anyone who wants an Eternity type scent with a little more meat to it!
kotenko34 – :
I sampled this and realized that I smelled this scent on people before. I felt thai it was more suitable for a men’s perfume. It also lasted quite long, almost 3hrs and I can still faintly smell it up close on my wrist. I don’t like it at all.
fvu664bedyWelty – :
On me…gardenia and honeysuckle. Nothing more. On about 5 minutes, powdery and soapy. Really clean and squeaky. A lite rose present. I’m in love is sexual sugar so this isn’t my cup of tea. Not the worst but I like gourmand.
woody_87_87 – :
This is not how sex should smell, definitely))))))) Very subtle, gentle version of Eternity CK without harsh cloves, sweeter in the drydown (light vanilla). It’s quite transparent and romantic.
Vampiryonok – :
It is very easy to be put off by this scent if you go strictly by opening notes. The top notes are loud, brash and screechy. I tested this and immediately put the bottle back, thinking it was a no go. As I continued to walk around, about 20 minutes later, this developed into a very warm, spicy, sexy scent. I went back and bought the bottle. There are several comparisons to Eternity here, but I don’t find them very similar. Sexual is missing the strong carnation note that I get from Eternity. Otherwise, they are similar in feel, but get less similar as you approach the base notes. I have learned that floral orientals need to be given time to settle and develop, to morph into their true nature. I am surprisingly happy with the way this one develops on me, and I really adore this bottle.
AVPOZITIV – :
Absolutely love the weight and shape of the bottle, as well as the fabulous photography of the sensuous curve of back and hint of buttocks…this is an example of the old adage ‘Sex Sells’. For me, Sexual started with a citrus hit, then mellowed to a pretty mix of florals with a touch of sandalwood to anchor and deepen it. Not what I usually consider outright sexy, but it got a very positive “Mmm, you smell really good…” reaction from the boyfriend. Longevity is best in Spring/Summer, with traces of base notes lingering 6 hours after application.
KykyshkaPW – :
bought this blind at TJ Maxx. One of my few misses doing so…. There was this note in it that was soooo weird. I can’t describe it. Just a bad really “perfume-y” smell. Got rid of this. The person I gave it to said it smelled a little like clinique happy, I could see it, but it’s the bad version of it.
anatolijkoval – :
I bought this on another blind buy on clearance for $8.99. I’m glad I didn’t spend more, because this one didn’t work for me at all. I assumed it would be a sweet, seductive fragrance because of the name, but instead it smells to me like flowers covered in cinnamon & other spices. I gave it a shot and tried it on my skin, and it was just too loud & cloying for me. I’m only 28, so I think this fragrance is just too “old” for me. If it were toned down with some milky vanilla I think it would mellow out some. My bottle & I will be parting ways. I will see if my mother or mother-in-law like this one.
naum913 – :
Smells a lot like Eternity by Calvin Klein but its not as sharp smelling.
I was very surprised that a perfume with the name “sexual” smelled so flowery and awake. Its nicer than Eternity and it doesn’t give me a headache like Eternity does but it definitely has nothing Sexual about it in my opinion.
It also smells like a toned down version of Sun moon and stars…..Meh
toasterec – :
I’ve had this perfume for years. The name for it is perfect, very sexy and hot. Flowery smell but the spices just picks everything up with a soft ensemble.
mixefem – :
Have seen this everywhere – Sears, Winners, Shoppers – so finally bought one when it was on for $20. This is an everyday, no nonsense perfume. Pleasant and non-offensive. No room-encompassing sillage nor sharp notes to make anyone sneeze. Within first hour, the citrus appears but softened by a soft floral and balanced with myrrh which lays low. I’ve been spraying it on my chest (under my shirt) so haven’t been able to test for compliments. Not sweet and too simple to be classified as sexy. If anything, it is great as a perfume to freshen up after the gym (in a pinch). As you can tell by now, I am not impressed but will finish this bottle so I don’t blind-buy again..tsk tsk.
On me,
Sillage: close to skin (a foot at most)
Longevity: 2-3 hours
Rating: 2/5 pleasant but not remarkable
Update: Spritzed three times under shirt and two on my hair one day. A co-worker who had a cold told me I smelled so good (whoops, one spray too much). Haven’t had a comment (good or bad) about any perfumes I’ve been wearing lately except for this.
sensus – :
Opens up with lots of creamy flower and citrus, with a hint of woodsy smell. Not heavy or suffocating; projected more air of flirt and confidence than sexuality.
I first wear this on the winter, and I think because of the heated office, it projected really wide (2 sprays, and my friend whose desk is about 6 feet from mine commented she can smell it!! Thank God she wasn’t bother by it^^’). Having experienced that, I try it in the summer, but somehow does not smell as good as it was in the (in door) winter. In the summer the flower got harsh.
I received lots of compliment (male and female) wearing this, actually this is the perfume that landed me most compliment.
Staying power: very good, I can still get a whiff of it at night.
So, comparing performance (on my skin) and price ($15 for a 75 ml bottle from discount store), I am really really happy with Sexual.
lapin.vasily2012 – :
This one is not really for me. I blind bought this at Ross and had I smelled this first would not have bought it! I don’t hate it, it’s just not great on my skin. Have to get rid of this one now!
Bigpapa – :
I agree this smells very similar to CK Eternity. I bought it unsniffed. I happened to have Eternity on the same day I bought this. I got into the car and sprayed it right away. I kept smelling the spot I sprayed it and thinking that I was smelling the Eternity I put on earlier as it smelled the same. Then I realized that wow, it was the same scent. Sexual smells a bit more sophisticated and rich. Lasting power is average. I like this alot and would buy it again.
MofgemAmomo – :
Yeeey! Today I’ve just realized Séxual by Michel Germain is smells like CK Eternity..and after this discovery, I just read the rewiews below and ooops..yes..I have to agree with the previous speakers: It’s really does..:)
But.Séxual is much sophisticated, much younger smell without sharp edges, like Eternity has.Please, don’t think this juice smells cheap..or it smells like a diluted version of the Calvin Klein’s creation..in fact it’s smells very expensive.( I have owned Eternity in the past, I’ve just bought it long time ago in the heat of the moment in the local perfume store..and I gave it to my mom, becuse I just couldn’t stand with it’s heady floral notes..:) )
I would say Séxual is a transition between of bold floral and muted soapiness.It has no the typical oriental face with sultriness and spicyness but it has some kind of intriguing elegance and freshness inside…This perfume just radiates the self-confidence!..and yes,should able to wear this perfume, and yes, it’s not for young girls.
Séxual by Michel Germain is a 10 years younger CK Eternity for the 10 years younger age group.Definitely..
Is this perfume sexy..? I rather say yes, it is…on its own ferial way..:)
Lepecrelf – :
I was given this perfume as a Christmas gift from one of my work clients. I would’ve probably never picked this out for myself. The very first day I wore this I received so many compliments on how great I smelled from women and men. Plus my fiance thinks it smells sexy. The lasting power is very good as well and it has just enough sillage, so it’s not overpowering
mfanatoliy – :
I always wanted to try it so when I came this scent in Ross’s for $12.99, it was no brainer. Now that I have the bottle, I can safely say that I probably wouldn’t have bought it if I had a chance to sample it first. To me, name is a gimmick because there is nothing “sexual” about this fragrance. Its a citrusy floral that is rather bright and sunny. I picture ladies in sundresses, wearing this to a garden party. Sometime in the past, there was this scent called Azzaro(?)that I owned and everytime I wore it, there was bunch of women who complimented me on it. Sexual reminded me of that frangrance-feminine floral that is suitable for all ages and occassions. I like it ok but I am definately not in love with it since anytime I wear a floral, I prefer something with more prominent gardenias and while gardenia is one of the notes in Sexual, I can’t even tell that its there. This is more of a citrus honeysuckle scent.
P.S. Here is my DH’s five cents-he said it smelled like citrusy shower gel and declared it “pleasant”. I can see why he thought that because this scent lays very close to the skin and doesn’t project a whole lot
miha31fgh – :
I purchased two small purse size atomizers of this @ Marshall’s for $5.00 each. I like the smell. It is some how reminiscent of Guerlain’s L’Instant to me (which I wear and adore). This feels calming, tender, sweet and relaxing to me…the name of the perfume does not seem to fit the scent. It is not a “signature” perfume, just a nice day time fragrance that I think would be inoffensive to wear in an office setting, to church, etc.
kiiskka – :
I absolutely LOVE this! Just got my $5 bottle from ebay and am so happy. The flowers and the cinnamon note make a lovely combination. Like other reviewers have said, it is very calming-I’m planning to douse myself in it as I go to bed tonight.
invonipat – :
Red Door meets Sunflowers, and didn’t hit it off.
I’m finding it more bearable in the winter, but when I first smelled it I was in agreement with the review by Catbiscuit.
It’s nice after several hours, however, kind of in the same way as Poison on me.
T4P – :
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 Grosjman 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.
Drive-Zombie – :
Holy moly, this is one gag-worthy perfume on my skin. Most of the notes listed in this I don’t get. What I do get is a whole boat load of wilted freesias and a strong, sour sweaty-chemical scent. And some soap in the drydown. Perhaps one of the most rank, synthetic things I’ve smelled. The overall effect on my skin is a little like sour beer. No offence to those who love it, but for me this one was a major scrubber. It’s very rare that I have such a strongly negative reaction to a fragrance.
volk05071983 – :
Calming and soothing, comforting and detoxicating. Not really sexual.
Sexual is a lovely creation but in my opinion aimed at calming senses down rather than arousing. The most prominent are myrrh, neroli and a hint of apricot. Lovely mixture, but the name is very misleading.
Sexual is a great inoffensive office fragrance and a great one when visiting family or going shopping with a friend on Saturday morning.
If worn in intimate situations – it would be most likely to have a ”Horlicks” effect. (Horlicks is a well known British make of a drink that helps to fall asleep)
I am far from saying, however, that it is boring; it is not but it will not turn you on, it will not boost your sexual apetite. It will calm you down afterwards, if anything 🙂
Worth trying if L’Instant De Guerlain appeals to you.
Geptpoinuetle – :
I picked up this beauty during my last visit to TJMaxx. After about 10 sprays on each wrist, its loveliness shines through. I wonder if it’s a little weak because I bought an older bottle or because the perfume itself is very subtle.
Funtik – :
If I can pull away from Kenzo for a minute, I would buy this because I smelled it twice in a department store and can’t forget it. It smells so good. I looked at the notes and I think about what I smelled so long ago and cinamon, bergamot etc… this is a perfume I couldn’t breakdown by note… it just smells good.
lue455speagoessenda – :
I bought this today and LOVE it! It’s a bit unusual (maybe the myrrh?) but I love the sandalwood and jasmine mix!!!
Lersendudge – :
I never ever thought I would own something named “Sexual”. I avoid those kinds of perfumes like a plague…just find those names sort of slutty.
But, actually, I had to return to the store several days later to get this beauty.
There is something so alluring and, yes, sexy, about it. I think a lot of people get disappointed because they expect something dark, mysterious, or spicy, or bold floral. I find this scent sexy in a flirty, playful kind of way, but at the same time mature and elegant, and not girly. Something that could be worn in spring or summer, with bright-colored clothes and high heels. The citrusy note lasts only for a few minutes, and the “sexual” part comes out in about 5-10 minutes, when it warms up and becomes completely floral. Very beautiful. After a while i see some similarity with Cristobal on my skin.
Even though it is a softer floral fragrance, I would not call shy. It has excellent sillage and will get you noticed for sure.
My second perfume from Michel Germain, and I am really amazed by the quality.
Definitely a keeper for me. I just have to keep its name a secret if asked what I’m wearing.
All I have to add a few hours later is that it ios very long lasting and expensive smelling!
end389Unlogrere – :
I’m a Sophia Grojsman fan, so I had to try Sexual. I agree, the name does not quite fit the fragrance. I associate the word “sexual” with spicy oriental, patchouli and/or musky scents.It’s a quality perfume, nothing overly synthetic or fake here.There’s one note in it that bothers me; I think it’s the Myrhh in the basenotes, which I’m not a fan of, which gives it a sourish, sweat smell…maybe that’s why it’s called “Sexual”.
Sexual is not a unisex scent because of the flowers, but it has a unisex Calvin Klein feel, if that makes any sense. Though it is a Michel Germain fragrance, it was created in 1994, during the era of Calvin Klein’s greatest perfume “hits”, and maybe Germain was trying to make a CK-like scent (just guessing). One reviewer mentioned a similarity to CK Eternity. It also reminds me of Alfred Sung’s Forever.
serbalabaev – :
I just picked this up at Marshalls and I love it. It is very spicy and I think nice to wear. It does go on loud (which I kinda like)and softens nicely and really lasts. And I do think it to be a sexy perfume.
Catalina27 – :
I have to admit that I bought this perfume from a well-known discount store solely based on it’s name, and I have to say, I am a little disappointed. It is not distinct at all, though it isn’t cloying or sickening either. I would like to describe what it smells like, but nothing stands out that much to me. Here are the adjectives that I can best attribute to this attribute-lacking fragrance: light, slightly powdery, inoffensive, casual, fleeting, barely citrusy, and MEH.
I don’t dislike Sexual, but if I smelled it first I probably wouldn’t have bothered. I’ll wear it occasionally, but it really doesn’t evoke much of anything for me. However, to its credit, I was hanging out with my girlfriend a few days ago and she complimented my perfume several times– and she is a bit of a perfume snob. Perhaps it settles quite nicely once I’ve stopped noticing it.
UPDATE: I have to mention that since I’ve worn this again, I’ve had two more people comment on how much they liked it. One person even mentioned it several days later, and without telling him what I was wearing, I asked him what it smelled like and he simply said, “Sex.” Haha!! I guess the name is a bit apt.
Pedoalmoniedo – :
Let it settle and you might find yourself pleasantly surprised . . . I must agree with Carla that the sexual aspect of this scent is really more subtle, more sensual, if you will. Not all men or women are aroused by a fragrance that comes on like gangbusters. The cinnamon and sandalwood notes have my guy absolutely purring . . .
smallville – :
So disapointed because I love sexual pour homme, and thought this would be the female equivalent of that amazing scent. There is a huge disconnect between the name and fragrance, like the reviewer mentioned below.It smells like licorice detergent!!! NOT SEXY. Also, it is not for young women, I think women 50+ should wear this
evg-ermolaev – :
I stumbled upon Sexual in the EA Outlet today and remembered I might have wanted to try it. At the very least, I had some spare skin so what’s the harm?
I have never smelled such a disconnect between a perfume’s name and its contents before. It sucks my will to live, let alone procreate.
Sexual is flat, greasy and boring to my nose. This is more ‘washing greasy pans in your trackies to AM radio’ than ‘Kim Basinger in 9 1/2 weeks’.
Yes, I am probably missing the point of all the florals but this perfume just makes me feel inexplicably depressed & much too tired to even try.
Lezgincik – :
I smelled this today and it reminded me a lot of Amarige. A very slightly spiced fruity floral. I didn’t find it to be very sexual, more feminine and cheery.
snaipermoldova – :
This is the first fragrance with a vanilla note that I can wear without a raging headache. And the best part? It’s a man-magnet. My SO turns into an animal when I wear this, however I don’t think he’s even aware that it’s the perfume.
NOTE: This should be called ‘Softly Sensual’. If you’re expecting a powerful, bold, spicy, vanilla scent then you’ll be disappointed.
It opens as a soft, warm floral with osmanthus and honeysuckle, then a slight hint of feminine gardenia and ethereal water lily. <b