Portal 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) True. But if you're looking at comparisons like the Kardashians having a perfume, you could compare/criticize them for a lot of things. They both spend an ungodly amount of money on fashion, they are both very very famous and so on... I don't know. I do see your point though that it IS too soon for her to have a fragrance and she should establish herself through her music first and focus on those things later but... i guess she's just taking advantage of what she has now and what's being offered it's just a perfume. I'd prefer if she didn't do it, but yeah, it is just a perfume. No sense getting mad about it. Edited June 13, 2012 by SiberianHusky Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
remm 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 The design of the bottle isn't very aesthetically pleasing as I'd thought it'd be. I hope the fragrance is nice, though. What a shame. I hope her next perfume bottle doesn't look as cheap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontbesweet 7 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Shes expanding her brand and everyones just b---hing about it -___- Because Gaga isn't a brand to us, she is a human. Releasing perfume goes against soo many things she's said in the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lugh121 50 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I would buy a perfume for its fragance not for its bottle design :shrug: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivingtonrebels 245 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) I think Gaga's concept is GENIUS. Everyone wants Fame, fame is a monster, the perfume looks like poison with an attractive name. It's different, like she is, which means it wouldn't have mass appeal without her name on it. It's certainly a more well-developed idea than an effing cat shaped bottle or one of Britney or Paris' fragrances that usually contain vague adjectives - 'curious' 'just me' For those of you shaming her for wanting a piece of the pie in the fragrance game - give me a break. You're like a bunch of whiny hipsters who get mad when their indie band makes it big. She deserves to be in the game. TBH - GET THAT PROMO. plus we get Sheisse out of it. :****this: Edited June 13, 2012 by rivingtonrebels Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Introvert 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 umm, you can shut the **** up--you don't know me, and you are not allowed to speak like you do either. men wear cologne, and women perfume--that makes sense. i know i as a straight man would never say, "oh, i'm wearing perfume...for men." that sounds ridiculous. likewise, a woman saying she is wearing cologne would sound stupid. don't give me your bull****, snarky remark--first off, idgaf what you think, and secondly, there shouldn't be that connontation of the girly gay guys who love fashion and perfume and all that ****. sure, some gay guys are like that, but that image doesn't represent the entire gay male population. that's all i'm saying. the ignorance of some people :roll: Men can wear perfume :roll: They can pull off some female fragrances depending on the individual male and how 'girly' the scent actually is. It doesn't matter if its intended for females, you just have to ask yourself if that particular scent fits you personally because afterall its just a scent. Secondly, Paris Hilton is the only celebrity i'm aware of that had a cologne line as well as a perfume line. Her first cologne is actually not that bad for a cheapy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelbHawker 6,583 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 :flopromance: This post makes the whole thread tbh. Thanks. ;) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentino 4 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 The primary market is FEMALE, and women generally want a perfume that makes them feel s-xy and feminine. So marketing as unis-x is silly. If you want most men to buy, you have to label as "for men." Yeah, I can wait; she'll make a unis-x one day I'm sure. I get a new album this year, so I'm satisfied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Monster 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I'd prefer if she didn't do it, but yeah, it is just a perfume. No sense getting mad about it. Because Gaga isn't a brand to us, she is a human. Releasing perfume goes against soo many things she's said in the past. but she's done/said a lot of things in the past that she contradicts now :| we just have to live past it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Introvert 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Because Gaga isn't a brand to us, she is a human. Releasing perfume goes against soo many things she's said in the past. I think what people tend to lose sight of is the fact that she is a commercial pop star. Regardless of her philanthropic efforts or her declarations of indifference about money. In order to keep herself around making music for all of us, she has to create lucrative opportunities to sell herself to the public. Yes shes musically gifted and I love her, but shes still a commercial pop star in the early stages of her career I think Gaga's concept is GENIUS. Everyone wants Fame, fame is a monster, the perfume looks like poison with an attractive name. It's different, like she is, which means it wouldn't have mass appeal without her name on it. It's certainly a more well-developed idea than an effing cat shaped bottle or one of Britney or Paris' fragrances that usually contain vague adjectives - 'curious' 'just me' For those of you shaming her for wanting a piece of the pie in the fragrance game - give me a break. You're like a bunch of whiny hipsters who get mad when their indie band makes it big. She deserves to be in the game. TBH - GET THAT PROMO. plus we get Sheisse out of it. :****this: preach. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elixt 34 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 It appears most of the fans on here are NEVER happy with what Gaga is doing any more :noparty: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMTT 160 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Men can wear perfume :roll: They can pull off some female fragrances depending on the individual male and how 'girly' the scent actually is. It doesn't matter if its intended for females, you just have to ask yourself if that particular scent fits you personally because afterall its just a scent. Secondly, Paris Hilton is the only celebrity i'm aware of that had a cologne line as well as a perfume line. Her first cologne is actually not that bad for a cheapy. well, most men, i feel, would disagree. i'm not saying men can't wear perfume, i'm just saying idt it makes sense. i'm a straight guy, so i wouldn't want to wear perfume. idk. i wouldn't want to wear perfume, because perfume is for women, cologne is for men. i hope you know what i mean, aha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Introvert 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) It appears most of the fans on here are NEVER happy with what Gaga is doing any more I think people have gotten jaded due to the constant belittling by certain folks of Gaga's relevance in popular culture :P Edited June 13, 2012 by lkjgdhs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
comrade 33 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 umm, you can shut the **** up--you don't know me, and you are not allowed to speak like you do either. men wear cologne, and women perfume--that makes sense. i know i as a straight man would never say, "oh, i'm wearing perfume...for men." that sounds ridiculous. likewise, a woman saying she is wearing cologne would sound stupid. don't give me your bull****, snarky remark--first off, idgaf what you think, and secondly, there shouldn't be that connontation of the girly gay guys who love fashion and perfume and all that ****. sure, some gay guys are like that, but that image doesn't represent the entire gay male population. that's all i'm saying. the ignorance of some people :roll: For someone who doesn't give a **** about what I think, you come off rather taken aback. You also seem oddly clung to the terminology. If a "unis-x perfume" sounds so atrociously impossible to you, just call it a "unis-x fragrance". Or if it really is the idea of a unis-x scent with no clear gender border that horrifies you like that , so indeed, hello 1950s. The primary market is FEMALE, and women generally want a perfume that makes them feel s-xy and feminine. So marketing as unis-x is silly. If you want most men to buy, you have to label as "for men." Tell that to Calvin Klein and the hugely successful cK One. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gagaloo911 12,959 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I think Gaga's concept is GENIUS. Everyone wants Fame, fame is a monster, the perfume looks like poison with an attractive name. It's different, like she is, which means it wouldn't have mass appeal without her name on it. It's certainly a more well-developed idea than an effing cat shaped bottle or one of Britney or Paris' fragrances that usually contain vague adjectives - 'curious' 'just me' For those of you shaming her for wanting a piece of the pie in the fragrance game - give me a break. You're like a bunch of whiny hipsters who get mad when their indie band makes it big. She deserves to be in the game. TBH - GET THAT PROMO. plus we get Sheisse out of it. :****this: Bless this post :worship2: And I think it looks amazing. Nothing like the perfume bottles/boxes of other celebrity perfumes. You guys are cray cray calling it tacky... just more ungrateful fans who must b---h about literally everything ​GaGa does. :smh: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts