To: Amy J who wrote (144062 ) 9/24/2001 11:52:06 PM From: tcmay Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894 "Perfume and colognes should be banned from flights. " Airlines are owned by the owners. It's their property. Leave it up to them. Let the market compete. Same thing with smoking. Some airlines will be "no smoking," some will be "smoking allowed." The market can choose. Ditto for restaurants. (I've never smoked one puff in my entire life. I hate cigarette smoke. But it is not my business nor anyone else's except the owners to establish the policies for the property they own. I can choose to patronize another restaurant or airline.) You asked the original poster whether he liked perfume and cologne. My answer is: no. Perfumes and colognes were mainly developed to deal with the fact that people in cities could not bathe for weeks or even months at a time. (Ancient Rome was an exception, with a well-established series of bathhouses. Some other places were near hot springs, or where the temperature was mild enough to allow outdoor bathing.) The capital of perfume and cologne, France, is known for its stinky people, even the women. (Not a slur, just the truth. They think the American custom of taking a shower or bath every day, sometimes more than one, is bizarre. They'd rather spritz with more cologne.) Most perfume to me smells cloyingly sweet...not attractive at all. There's the marketing jive about some perfumes containing "musk," said to be a sexual aphrodisiac, but scientists have never seen proof that humans react this way, least of all the musk glands from oxen, pigs, and goats. Thus, I'm glad that most California women today use very little perfume. But there should *not* be laws interfering with how either United Airlines or Intel Corporation or Il Fornaio set their perfume or smoking policies. My property, my rules. Their property, their rules. --Tim May