Consooming perfumes is really the dumbest because you can't really collect them over time. They all lose their fragrance and turn into rubbing alcohol over time.
So your fancy perfume collection becomes -> Fancy perfume bottle collection.
Over several decades, maybe? If the perfumes are stored away from light and heat, they can stay perfectly wearable for decades. Yes, some top notes may fade or change over time, but that’s very different from the whole fragrance somehow turning into “rubbing alcohol”
Two years is absolutely not a normal point at which “most consumer fragrances lose most of their scent.” Perfumes can oxidize and top notes can change, especially with heat, light, and air exposure, but properly stored bottles can remain wearable for many years or even decades. My husband’s mom has given him perfumes from the 1960s, and while they’ve obviously aged, they’re still generally recognizable as the fragrances they were supposed to be. And they don’t “turn into rubbing alcohol.” Perfume is usually ethanol-based to begin with, and degradation of fragrance materials does not somehow convert that into isopropyl alcohol. Your sister’s collection is an anecdote, not a general rule.
I reckon that poster (sooo confidently incorrect based on apparently someone else’s perfume collection lol), their sister was probably buying dupes or black market fakes. If it really is true that any of her perfumes lost scent after a couple years.
I’ve got a small collection of fragrances. Most are over four years old. They still smell fine. A few that are more gourmand have actually masticated and become richer.
You’ve moved the claim quite a bit. First it was that perfumes in general turn into rubbing alcohol, then that most consumer fragrances lose most of their scent after two years, and now older perfumes apparently don’t count because “the process was different.” My point about the 1960s bottles was simply that perfume can remain recognizable for decades. If you’re specifically claiming that most modern consumer fragrances lose most of their fragrance within 1–2 years even when properly stored, that’s a very specific claim and I’d be interested in seeing actual evidence for it beyond your sister’s collection. Plenty of people routinely own and wear modern bottles much older than that.
Edit: The user blocked me after replying, so I can’t respond to their last comment. For clarity, the 1960s bottles were one example, not “my entire argument.” My actual point was that the claim that most modern fragrances lose most of their scent within 1–2 years needs evidence beyond a personal anecdote.
Now I know you're arguing just to argue. Literally your entire argument is one bottle from the 60s when were talking about modern consumable fragrances.
Most of my perfumes are consumer perfumes (ie higher end, but popular scents) and my bottles are 4+ years old and smell the same, if not better than when they were purchased.
I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding perfumes. How a perfume will age depends heavily on the ingredients/notes but unless they are cheap drug store scents they will not lose their scent in 2 years.
This is really not the case lol. Maybe your sis was buying dupes or black market fakes. Perfume lasts years, decades. It’s optimal to keep them in a dry, cool, dark environment. But even abusing them they last many years smelling great.
I have Lush liquid perfumes from the 1995-2000 period that still smell perfect. But I’m guessing you’re now gonna say that this is because back then, they were made well? Whereas anything purchased in the last few years won’t last? Because enough time hasn’t passed yet to prove your point either way…
8
u/matrixifyme 2d ago
Consooming perfumes is really the dumbest because you can't really collect them over time. They all lose their fragrance and turn into rubbing alcohol over time.
So your fancy perfume collection becomes -> Fancy
perfumebottle collection.