Scent as Subversion: Perfume in Political Resistance Movements

Throughout history, perfume has served as more than mere adornment—it has been a powerful medium for political expression and resistance. From revolutionary France to indigenous communities fighting colonization, from gender nonconformists to environmental activists, fragrance has provided a subtle yet potent vehicle for challenging established power structures. In these contexts, choosing a scent becomes a deliberate act of identity assertion, cultural preservation, or political defiance.

As historian Annick Le Guérer writes in her acclaimed work “Scent: The Mysterious and Essential Powers of Smell”: “Throughout history, perfume has been far more than a simple aesthetic pleasure. It has served as a powerful marker of identity, status, and belief—a substance capable of both enforcing and subverting established social hierarchies.”[^1] This tension between olfactory conformity and rebellion has shaped political movements across cultures and centuries.

This exploration delves into the provocative intersection where perfume meets political resistance—where scent becomes subversion and fragrance transforms into a form of fight.

The relationship between perfume and political power crystallized during the French Revolution, when the heavy, animalic scents favored by the aristocracy became dangerous liabilities. Catherine de’ Medici’s perfumer had created what would become the first celebrity fragrance in Renaissance Europe, establishing perfume as a marker of aristocratic privilege. This association later made it a target during revolutionary periods, as the aristocracy faced persecution for their luxurious lifestyle.

“When the Revolution struck in 1789, many of France’s leading perfumers had to scale down their enterprises. A final blow was struck to the perfume industry when the 500-year-old perfumers’ guild, the maîtres gantiers-parfumeurs, was disbanded along with all other organized trade guilds in 1791. With time, of course, the French fragrance industry rebounded, and France once again became the world’s leader in stylish smells.”[^2] This period of disruption and subsequent recovery illustrates how deeply perfume was intertwined with the political landscape of the era.

Post-revolution, a new olfactory aesthetic emerged—lighter, cleaner scents that rejected the heavy musk and civet associated with royal excess. This wasn’t merely a change in fashion; it was political resistance encoded in olfactory preferences.

As historian Alain Corbin observes in his seminal work on scent and society, “The Foul and the Fragrant”: “The olfactory revolution of the late eighteenth century reflected deeper social transformations. The rejection of heavy animalic scents was part of a broader questioning of aristocratic values and privileges.”[^3] Corbin’s historical analysis demonstrates how changing attitudes toward smell reflected the social and political upheavals of pre-revolutionary France.

The concept of “olfactory racism” emerged during colonial periods, where colonial powers deliberately created negative olfactory associations with colonized peoples to reinforce Western hegemony. However, Indigenous communities actively used their diverse scents to assert their identity against Western commodification.

Native American tribes, including the Choctaw and Cherokee Nations, maintained their traditional use of sweetgrass, sage, and cedar in spiritual ceremonies, viewing these practices as essential to their cultural identity and resistance against colonial pressures. These aromatic rituals persisted despite aggressive assimilation policies, becoming invisible threads of continuity in cultural resistance.

“Sweetgrass is used in smudges, healing or talking circles because it has a healing effect - its smoke is believed to purify thoughts and the environment and eliminate bad or negative thoughts,” explains Indigenous Corporate Training Inc. “To the Anishinaabe Nation (Woodland Indians), it is believed to be the sacred hair of O’gushnan, Mother Earth, and is often braided; with the three sections representing mind, body, and soul.”[^4]

Today, the appropriation of these sacred scent traditions by commercial perfumery raises new questions about cultural ownership and resistance. Indigenous communities continue to advocate for recognition of their olfactory traditions as living spiritual practices rather than merely “exotic” ingredients for luxury products.

The rigid gendering of fragrance—floral for women, fougère for men—emerged primarily in the 19th century as part of broader Victorian gender codification. This artificial division has been challenged repeatedly through perfume resistance movements that question why molecules should have gender at all.

When Coco Chanel introduced No. 5 in 1921, with its abstract composition and aldehydic notes, she wasn’t simply launching a new perfume. For Chanel, the number five was especially esteemed as signifying “the pure embodiment of a thing, its spirit, its mystic meaning.” This perfume represented a departure from the overtly feminine floral compositions expected of women’s fragrances at the time.[^5]

The contemporary resurgence of unisex fragrances represents a direct challenge to established norms, reflecting a broader cultural shift towards gender fluidity. Brands like Comme des Garçons and Byredo have built their identities around rejecting gendered marketing altogether.

Research has demonstrated that the gendering of scent is primarily cultural rather than biological. While individual skin chemistry can affect how a fragrance develops, the strict categorization of scents as “masculine” or “feminine” reflects social constructs rather than inherent olfactory qualities of the materials themselves.

The industry is undergoing a significant transformation driven by environmental activism and consumer demand for sustainability. Niche perfumers are increasingly adopting natural ingredients and sustainable practices, moving away from petrochemical-based synthetic fragrances that contribute to environmental degradation.

According to recent research, the perfume industry faces significant challenges in implementing sustainable supply chain management. These include balancing economic considerations with environmental and social responsibilities across a highly fragmented global network of suppliers and producers. Sustainable perfume production requires addressing issues from responsible sourcing of natural ingredients to reducing carbon footprints throughout the manufacturing and distribution process.

Many brands have embraced sustainability initiatives, focusing on biodiversity enhancement, carbon footprint management, and social responsibility. This includes improving working conditions for farmers and local communities while maintaining transparent supply chains.

As Jennifer Ogunsola Walters notes in her 2024 Forbes profile of sustainable fragrance brands, “The fragrance industry’s history hasn’t always been green. It’s been a story of luxury, desire, and often, of exploitation and environmental oversight. Traditionally, the industry has relied on practices that prioritized scent over sustainability, leading to overharvesting of natural resources, use of synthetics without regard to biodegradability and labor practices that sometimes fell short of ethical standards.”[^6]

This shift represents a new chapter in perfume and politics, where the battlefield has moved from class struggle to climate crisis, and resistance takes the form of sustainable innovation.

The debate between natural and synthetic ingredients reflects broader cultural and political tensions within the fragrance world. Recent European Union regulations highlight the complex interplay between cultural preservation and safety regulations.

The fragrance industry faces challenges in balancing traditional craftsmanship with modern regulatory requirements. “The natural versus synthetic debate isn’t merely technical,” explains Karen Gilbert, a respected perfumery teacher and author. “Natural materials are highly concentrated and packed full of allergens. Oakmoss, Rose Absolute, Jasmine and Ylang Ylang are all highly restricted in perfumery due to the skin sensitising effects.”[^7]

The International Fragrance Association (IFRA) sets standards that “ban, limit or set criteria for the use of certain ingredients, based on scientific evidence and consumer insights.” These standards are designed to help people “enjoy the art of perfumery with confidence” while ensuring safety.[^8]

Recent investigations have revealed ethical concerns in natural ingredient sourcing, particularly regarding labor practices in jasmine harvesting. These findings have sparked debates about corporate responsibility and the true cost of luxury perfumes, leading to calls for greater transparency and accountability in the industry.

The political history of perfume continues to evolve, with each era finding new ways to encode resistance in scent. From the French Revolution’s rejection of aristocratic excess to today’s battles over sustainability and cultural appropriation, perfume remains a surprisingly potent vehicle for political expression.

As we look toward the future, several emerging trends suggest perfume’s political significance will only intensify. The growing movement for ingredient transparency may evolve into demands for ethical supply chain certification, similar to fair trade labeling in the food industry. Digital scent technology, while still in its infancy, could democratize perfume creation, allowing marginalized communities to preserve and share their olfactory heritage without corporate intermediaries.

Climate change will likely transform perfumery in profound ways. As traditional growing regions become unsuitable for certain botanicals, we may witness the emergence of “extinction scents” – fragrances that memorialize ingredients lost to environmental degradation. These could become powerful symbols in climate activism, making abstract environmental losses tangibly present through scent memory.

The decolonization of the perfume industry may accelerate, with indigenous communities asserting greater control over their aromatic cultural heritage through benefit-sharing agreements and community-owned fragrance brands. This could challenge the centuries-old European dominance of professional perfumery.

Finally, as our understanding of scent’s neurological impacts deepens, we may see the emergence of “functional political perfumes” designed to trigger specific emotional responses in public spaces – perhaps courage during protests or empathy during negotiations.

As we inhale the complex compositions that perfumers create, we might consider what political messages we’re breathing in alongside those carefully calibrated notes. In the world of fragrance, even the most delicate scent can carry the weight of revolution – and in tomorrow’s struggles for justice and sustainability, perfume may prove an unexpectedly powerful ally.

Perfume has been used in political resistance in various ways throughout history. During the French Revolution, rejecting aristocratic heavy animalic scents in favor of lighter compositions represented a rejection of the old regime. Indigenous communities have used traditional scent practices to maintain cultural identity despite colonial suppression. In modern times, sustainable and ethical perfumery challenges corporate environmental practices and labor exploitation.

Olfactory racism refers to the practice of associating negative smells with marginalized groups to reinforce social hierarchies. Colonial powers often characterized indigenous peoples as having “unpleasant” odors to justify discrimination. Perfume resistance against this included indigenous communities maintaining their traditional scent practices and reclaiming their olfactory heritage as a form of cultural preservation and identity assertion.

Gender norms in perfumery have been challenged through the creation of unisex fragrances, the rejection of traditional gendered marketing, and the reclamation of historically gendered scent families. Perfumers like Coco Chanel challenged feminine stereotypes with abstract compositions, while contemporary brands like Comme des Garçons reject gender categorization altogether. This represents perfume symbolism being used to challenge broader social constructs around gender.

Environmental activism in modern perfumery focuses on sustainable sourcing, ethical labor practices, reduced carbon footprints, and transparency in supply chains. Niche perfumers often lead this movement by rejecting petrochemical-based synthetics, developing direct relationships with growers, and creating biodegradable packaging. This represents cultural resistance through fragrance that challenges corporate environmental practices.

Regulations, particularly in the European Union, have restricted the use of certain natural materials due to potential allergens or toxicity concerns. This has created tension between regulatory bodies, traditional perfumers, and cultural heritage preservation. The resistance to these regulations represents a form of perfume politics where artisanal practices and cultural traditions are defended against industrial standardization.

[^1]: Annick Le Guérer, Scent: The Mysterious and Essential Powers of Smell (New York: Turtle Bay Books, 1992), 135.

[^2]: Elisabeth de Feydeau, “Scent and Sensibility: A History of Perfumes,” Getty Museum, 2018, https://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/perfumes/history_of_perfumes.html .

[^3]: Alain Corbin, The Foul and the Fragrant: Odor and the French Social Imagination (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986), 58.

[^4]: Indigenous Corporate Training Inc., “Indigenous Sacred Plants: Sweetgrass,” Blog, Indigenous Corporate Training Inc., 2022, https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/indigenous-sacred-plants-sweetgrass .

[^5]: Tilar J. Mazzeo, The Secret of Chanel No. 5: The Intimate History of the World’s Most Famous Perfume (New York: HarperCollins, 2010), 76.

[^6]: Jennifer Ogunsola Walters, “Eco-Chic Scents: Profiling The Sustainable Fragrance Movement,” Forbes, April 4, 2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenniferogunsolawalters/2024/04/04/eco-chic-scents-profiling-the-sustainable-fragrance-movement/ .

[^7]: Karen Gilbert, “Naturals versus Synthetics in Perfumery,” Karen Gilbert, 2023, https://www.karengilbert.co.uk/naturals-versus-synthetics-in-perfumery .

[^8]: International Fragrance Association (IFRA), “The IFRA Standards – Helping You to Enjoy Fragrance with Confidence,” IFRA, 2023, https://ifrafragrance.org/safe-use/introduction .