Scent Discrimination

For some reason the business of 'scenting' came to my attention. Why do we often use fruit as the scent for shampoos, conditioners, air fresheners, etc? I'm not saying for one moment that these scents resemble the real odours of the fruits, but I find it a little odd that we choose to use 'foods' to make our hair, air, washing etc a bit more attractive (ie apple, berry, etc).



My question is, where and why has an invisible line been drawn? Why don't we have herring scented shampoo, beef scented clothes detergent (besides inviting predatory animals to savage our clothes - obviously not a good choice if going to the zoo for the day - so perhaps there is good reason not to use venison scented shampoo). However, the gap between the intended scent and the actual scent has probably saved us daily attacks from parrots, bats, foxes, and a myriad of other fruit-eaters.

I can already see the marketing - New ocean-fresh sardine soap, a fragrance that will attract the cool cats. Okay, so maybe that would have worked back in the 50's-60's when the hip were known as 'cool cats' (no one said I was an advertising genius)...but you get my point.




Most of us seem to love the smell of fried onions, so where is the fried onion air freshener? Is the line drawn around the fruit category? Does that mean that the almond scented shampoo is the rogue in the bathroom? Okay, so maybe we can extend that to fruit and nuts.

So where do vegetables fit in? Where is the carrot scented candles, the celery soap, and the sweetcorn dishwashing liquid? Do they not smell as sweet, attractive or as complex? Are we to forego the pumpkin fabric softener for the lemon, the broccoli scented shampoo for the olive, and the pea diffusing oil for some unspecified berry?


If vegetables or sheep could talk I reckon they'd have a case for discrimination. Personally, I'd be sending them to the Equal Opportunities Commission.