Bourbon's racist history: "It’s simply a warning to be careful which myths we choose to swallow."

Library of Congress.

To view an antebellum image like this is to be reminded that discussions of racist and sexist advertising in "craft" beer are perfectly legitimate, and to be encouraged, lest the Wayback Machine deposits us in unsavory locales.

The recent election outcome isn't to my taste. Let's hope it doesn't take us all the way back to the 1850s, shall we?

Sugarcoating a painful history, by Christine Sismondo (The Globe and Mail)

Marketing-driven nostalgia is bringing people back to American whiskey, whose history, like the country itself, is steeped in anti-black racism

The past decade has been soaked in bourbon, and it’s easy to see why. It tastes like sweet, boozy, butterscotch-ripple ice cream and the price point is decent compared with Scotch.

But the biggest reason for a renewed enthusiasm for the corn-based spirit, however, has been its marketing, which trades on the idea of a hand-crafted product with a long-established heritage ...

 ... The golden age wasn’t particularly golden for those who experienced the lynchings and daily terrorism that was part and parcel of the era being idealized. African-Americans know this, which is why bourbon has never sold terribly well in their communities. Around the turn of the previous century, gin was what they preferred. And ever since African-American soldiers from Jim Crow-era southern states were deployed to fight in Europe in both wars, Cognac has been the most popular liquor among African-Americans who could afford it.

___

AFTER THE FIRE: New Albany’s Harvest Homecoming occupation isn't alleviating my "craft" beer Twitter depression.

AFTER THE FIRE: New Albany’s Harvest Homecoming occupation isn't alleviating my "craft" beer Twitter depression. 

A weekly column by Roger A. Baylor.

Idly cruising Twitter one recent evening, I happened upon a jarring retweet dispensed from a regional “craft” brewery’s official account.

It was nasty and misogynistic attack on the plaintiff in a biracial rape case, and judging from the hashtags, it may originally have emanated from supporters of the once and future Klansman, David Duke. Sadly, both Indiana and Kentucky have been traditional bastions of hooded white supremacy.

This dubious retweet was deleted so rapidly that I wasn’t able to snap a screenshot, and for this I’m oddly thankful, although my comforting rationale for its hasty removal – hey, someone probably confused his or her personal account with the brewery handle – isn’t tremendously reassuring upon closer examination.

Since the dawn of the brewing revolution, it has been my operating assumption that most of us are leftists. In the 90s, I simply can’t recall meeting very many fascists in the business.

However, as someone told me back in kindergarten, never assume; you make an ass out of "u" and me. Probably my sampling was always too small, and in terms of demographics, it’s unlikely that "craft" beer would be any different in attitudinal composition than the nation as a whole.

And yet it strikes me that positing a split between Democrats and Republicans (or liberals versus conservatives) in "craft" brewing circles is one thing, and retweeting the likes of David Duke is something else entirely.

Aberrant? Abhorrent? As the shoe or mash paddle fits.

It’s hard imagining me as a cockeyed optimist, but I genuinely believed that what we were doing in elevating better beer was ultimately inclusive – in ideal terms, if not in socio-economic reality. After all, there’s a market for dollar beers utterly removed from our reach.

Sexism, racism, abject macho stupidity -- tell me, how is this strengthening the revolution’s gains?

Or is it that you’re ignorant of the revolution’s tenets … and by extension, certain key elements of the American historical record? Given the comic-opera presidential campaign, perhaps 2016 was destined to be the year when the last bits of innocence went swirling down gold-plated toilets.

There isn’t much one grizzled veteran of the beer wars can do to protest in a case like this, though one response is crystal clear to me: I buy far less beer than before, and giving me a reason not to buy yours makes my choice -- nay, my life -- much easier.

How very disappointing.

---

Closer to home, New Albany’s peculiar institution of Harvest Homecoming approaches.

This year, the Curmudgeons are taking a rational route out of the ensuing discordancy – specifically, I-65, which gets us started on the northward journey to Madison, Wisconsin and four classic days removed from the civic daze.

Properly rendered, community festivals are just the sort of exercise to promote good times, unite the citizenry, help us bond through joy and alcohol (on second thought, that’s a redundancy), and maybe provide another yearly excuse to conduct a spate of deep street cleaning – preferably, both before and after the crowds come through.

Unfortunately, when it comes to celebrations, New Albany prefers ponderous bludgeoning over subtle stilettos. In rhetorical terms, so do I, and yet my feelings about Harvest Homecoming probably are more nuanced than they often appear to be.

I like it, except when I don’t.

Harvest Homecoming is New Albany’s annual 800-lb municipal gorilla, or stated more mildly, it is the granddaddy of all festivals in this slowly recovering, stubbornly hidebound city.

The annual arrival of the itinerant carney corps follows the opening Saturday parade, an increasingly dull “family-oriented” exercise, and then on the following Thursday the heart of the historic downtown business district is handed over lock, stock and sewer pipe to Harvest Homecoming’s mysterious, Kremlinesque governing committee.

Four solid days of throng-crowded booths ensue, increasingly manned not by local indies but roving huckster mercenaries, dispensing foodstuffs, arts, crafts, politics and anti-abortion counseling, and completely disrupting any semblance of downtown commerce as meant to function normally.

Increasingly, this yearly disruption constitutes the flash point. For decades, there was little objection to Harvest Homecoming’s yearly invasion and occupation of downtown, because downtown was a ghost town.

Now it isn’t, and dynamic revitalization has a predictable way of igniting a revolution of rising expectations among a new generation of downtown business owners, investors and clients.

These are plain facts.

However, as yet, there is no obvious solution to dynamism’s clash with conservatism, primarily because the low level of daily communication between various interested parties makes sparse dialogue between North and South Korea look like a beer hall sing-along in Munich.

Yes, there have been painstakingly slow and incremental concessions, and as Harvest Homecoming generationally reloads, the festival slowly is going through a necessary process of reinvention.

May it proceed a bit faster, please.

But from the standpoint of newer downtown businesses, the root equation remains largely unaltered: Harvest Homecoming’s longtime business model is dependent on the existence of a clean, moribund downtown grid that no longer exists, and if anything, will grow even less adaptive to the festival’s needs in the years to come as downtown residency become the norm, not the exception.

My personal nuances are these: I don’t dislike the idea of Harvest Homecoming, only its current implementation. I believe it can be adapted to take full advantage of potential symmetry between it and an evolving downtown business district, without sacrificing its tradition, and to the benefit of all parties involved. I envision a downtown food and drink court on the current booth grid, one maximizing the uniqueness of our burgeoning dining scene, retaining space for booths while not blocking year-long purveyors. I foresee a celebration of what downtown New Albany is, and is becoming.

You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. I’m just the only one stupid enough to dream aloud. For this, I'm sure to be punished.

Again.

(Go here to learn about a wonderful new initiative on Friday, October 7 called the Harvest Beer Hop)

---

September 26: AFTER THE FIRE: The seasonality of Oktoberfest in time, beer and year.

September 19: AFTER THE FIRE: This week in solipsistic beer narcissism (2014).

September 12: AFTER THE FIRE: England, or one man's heightened cholesterol panic is another man's nostalgic repast (2013).

September 5: AFTER THE FIRE: Beer stories and bedtime for gonzo (2013).

__

(3 of 4) 18th Street's Sex and Candy, and wondering, "What ... the Brewers Association (Is) Doing to Address Gender and Race?"

The heated discussion about 18th Street's Sex and Candy dovetailed with a blogger's account of chats about gender and race in "craft" brewing at the recently concluded Craft Brewers Conference.

What is the Brewers Association's position, and by extension, is this something appropriate for consideration by state guilds?

You probably already know my answer to the latter question. I think it is.

wordpress.com/2016/05/09/what-is-the-brewers-association-doing-to-address-gender-and-race/">What Is the Brewers Association Doing to Address Gender and Race?

(By Bryan Roth, at This Is Why I'm Drunk)

 ... Some context before we get to the #longread.

The last few weeks have been ripe for discussion. Last month, one brewer’s Facebook rant on sexism went viral, and rightfully so. Last week, a Twitter argument erupted over a questionable beer label, and rightfully so. Hell, this year’s James Beard Award for Journalism went to a story about the lack of minorities in the beer industry.

It’s not hard to find labels that could easily be found as offensive.

1 of 4
2 of 4
3 of 4
4 of 4

__

Brewers of Indiana Guild: "We obviously don’t condone sexism or racism."

I'd have posted this statement sooner, but only now was made aware of its release. No such sentiment is perfect, but I'm just glad the Brewers of Indiana Guild said something publicly about an issue I feel is significant (my column on sexism and racism in "marketing messages" is here).

These thoughts are appreciated.

---

THE GUILD’S STANCE ON FREE SPEECH, FREE ENTERPRISE AND REPRESENTING OUR MEMBERSHIP

January 23, 2015 | Tristan Schmid, Posted in News | Be the first to comment.

As the craft beer industry grows rapidly (there are already 100 craft breweries in Indiana alone), so grows the array of associated marketing messages–and the likelihood that a beer name, or even a whole brewery’s branding, will offend someone.

We’ve recently been alerted to questionable beer branding put forth by some of our members. While we, the Brewers of Indiana Guild, do represent all Indiana craft breweries, we do not exist to police them or offer a moral authority on the way they conduct their business.

Our objectives are to:

• promote the highest standards of professional brewing in Indiana
• increase public awareness and appreciation for the variety and quality of Indiana craft beer
• advocate for state and federal laws that promote Guild Members’ ideals and that foster brewery profitability
• provide a forum for discussion, support and initiatives for the common good of Indiana’s brewing industry

Given the above, we obviously don’t condone sexism or racism.

Yet we cannot enforce regulations or principles upon any of our members. We support their constitutional right to free speech and their ability to run their businesses as they see fit.

However, the Guild, as a non-profit trade association, can offer guidance to our member breweries that can help prevent issues which are likely to cause offense–or even the failure of their business.

We’re working on offering continuing education opportunities, like our first-ever Indiana Brewers’ Conference this spring, and creating an Indiana Brewers’ Handbook, all of which will offer guidance to to both new and established breweries and decrease the likelihood that our members will make mistakes.

We’re working hard so we can bring the craft brewing industry in Indiana to a higher level–together.

The PC: Ripped straight from the pages of an Onion satire: “13 white males not really so eager to discuss issues like racism and sexism.”

It's a "double" IPA -- get it?

The PC: Ripped straight from the pages of an Onion satire: “13 white males not really so eager to discuss issues like racism and sexism.”

A weekly web column by Roger A. Baylor.


This column is written by an individual. It doesn’t necessarily reflect the views of businesses and organizations with which I’m affiliated.

The rise in support for same-sex marriage over the past decade is among the largest changes in opinion on any policy issue over this time period. A new national survey finds that much of the shift is attributable to the arrival of a large cohort of young adults – the Millennial generation – who are far more open to gay rights than previous generations … The long-term shift in the public’s views about same-sex marriage is unambiguous (Pew Research).

Shift happens, but today’s column is not about same-sex marriage. Rather, it’s about changing one’s mind.

To me, not only is this possible. It’s inevitable, and old dogs can indeed learn new tricks. Pertaining to humanity’s evolution, change and adaptation are necessary for our very survival, and if you need proof for this assertion, read Jared Diamond’s 2005 book Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.

I’ve changed my mind many times when presented with persuasive evidence contrary to my previous assumptions. I used to be satisfied drinking Stroh’s – then I wasn’t. My mind and my tastes evolved, and an immensely enjoyable 30-year journey through the world has followed. Changes in latitude could not have occurred without changes in attitude.

---

In 2011, the New Albanian Brewing Company participated in a collaboration with De Struise Brouwers and the Louisville Beer Store. The beer we brewed together at Bank Street Brewhouse was (and is) called Naughty Girl.

I’m not entirely certain who coined the name, though probably it was Urbain from De Struise. With characteristic irreverence, we all agreed to describe it as a Belgo India Blonde Ale. Tony Beard, NABC’s one-man graphics department, created a mermaid image, and we’ve used it ever since. Naughty Girl has been brewed once or twice a year, and the current plan is to do so again this spring.

A question has been asked of me on more than one occasion since 2011, most recently yesterday: Is NABC’s Naughty Girl an offensive example of stereotyping, using sexual imagery to sell beer?

My flippant stock reply has been consistent. Given the painfully small amount of Naughty Girl we’ve actually sold, in this instance the sex hasn't been nearly salacious enough. It’s a seasonal release, we’re a small brewery, and for us, viral remains something applicable to prevailing influenza strains and not annual barrelage growth rates. We don’t sell as much of anything as we’ve hoped, and the biggest mover remains Hoptimus, which bears a depiction of an anthropomorphized children’s toy.

In fact, when it comes to shameless stereotyping, we’ve thought of putting IPA in big, block letters on every label of every beer we produce: Belgian Table IPA, Robust Porter IPA, English Mild IPA, Doppelbock IPA, and so on. Now, there’s a strategy for cynical exploitation as it pertains to spotlighting and unfairly targeting obliviousness-ism.

But seriously: Is NABC Naughty Girl representative of sexism? Does it reinforce sexist responses?

Sexism or gender discrimination is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's sex or gender. Sexist attitudes may stem from traditional stereotypes of gender roles, and may include the belief that a person of one sex is intrinsically superior to a person of the other (Wikipedia).

Maybe it is sexist, and maybe it isn't, but either way, I’m prepared to think about it, to discuss it, and to open my mind to ideas differing from those I previously took for granted. I think Tony’s images reinforce positive tenets, because they’re strong women – and yet I can see where there is disagreement.

Although I don’t have any children, maybe it would be a good idea for me to imagine that I did -- and not only daughters. Granted, I could make the argument that my company is 67% female-owned, but I won’t. It’s irrelevant.

So much for stock replies, because I’m in the process of changing my mind, as well as slipping the leash. That’s because at the risk of hypocrisy, I’m suggesting that more “craft” beer advocates, whether brewers or consumers, insiders or outsiders, should take a step back and glance outside our self-congratulatory perimeter, out into the real world, especially when confronted with an image like this one.

I know what you’re probably thinking, so let’s pause here. Two weeks ago in France, fundamentalist Islamic terrorists of medieval outlook ruthlessly murdered twelve people over satirical cartoons, and this sickens us all, so you need to know that I’m on Voltaire’s side as it pertains to Route 2 Brews in Lowell, Indiana, and in defending the absolute right of this brewery to be utterly, remorselessly tasteless.

I suppose raincoaters have needs, too.

As an individual whose viewpoint is capable of evolution, I accept the customary dictate: I support your right to hold views contrary to mine, and when our spheres overlap, I reserve my right to try with all my might to persuade you otherwise, stopping short of physical violence, and relying on the veracity of my ideas.

Irrespective of the potential outcome of my efforts, it remains clear that individual conscience is the first step in this evolution. It can take time. So do a great many good things.

---

Now, to the next interconnected ring. From individual conscience, one moves to communities both great and small.

In general, the “craft” beer business is avoiding this dialogue about sexism, and I view this as a high horse in urgent need of dismounting.

In particular, Leg Spreader is a “craft” beer brewed in the state of Indiana. Does it convey the message desired of Hoosier beer?

In turn, this begs other questions: Collectively, what is our message? Exactly what are we espousing? Are we a collective, or does each brewery stand alone? If we are a collective, what are our rights and responsibilities as free-standing breweries within the broader grouping?

Why ask these questions?

I’ll answer this with another question, one referencing a familiar example: How many rugged individualists, by themselves, ever managed to convince the Indiana legislature to allow Indiana breweries to sell carry-out beer on Sunday?

The answer is none. Rather, it was all of them working together, collectively and cooperatively. That’s the message, at least in part.

As many of you know, I’m a director on the board of the Brewers of Indiana Guild (BIG). It’s a chartered non-profit professional trade grouping that works, organizes and lobbies on behalf of all Indiana breweries, including ones as small as Route 2 Brews and NABC, and as large as Three Floyds and Sun King.

To me, as it pertains to Route 2 Brews as a de facto member of this guild, irrespective of precise obligations implied by a dues structure, which the guild does not yet enforce (in my view, it should), there are certain understandings that need to be shared, and certain obligations that need to be recognized.

Most prominently, the guild works very hard, all year round, to make the business and regulatory atmosphere in Indiana more amenable to “craft” beer, as the growler sales example above illustrates. By extension, the guild obviously helps to improve the bottom lines of Indiana “craft” brewers, including Route 2 Brews. Leg Spreader has the potential to harm these efforts, and while censorship is out of the question, a firmly friendly chat about collective cooperation surely is not.

Interestingly, and in my opinion something fully applicable to the present discussion, the conceptual basis of BIG’s annual legislative agenda rests on a plea of exceptionalism. Because Indiana’s brewers are small-scale, artisanal producers, we qualify for special minority status. We get breaks. We can self-distribute. We’re delighted to pour growlers to go on Sunday when other outlets cannot. In a heartbeat, we’d accept lower excise taxes awarded us by virtue of our minority status.

To a greater or lesser extent, “craft” beer’s outreach in legislatures across the nation, and also with the federal government, is reliant on this argument from an exceptionalism based on size. We accept what amounts to affirmative action on the production end of the beer supply chain, and some (like me) advocate openly extending it to product placement in government-owned venues like sports stadiums, and at government-sponsored civic fests.

Given this, wouldn't you think that whether the grouping is Route 2 Brews, Craft Beer Nation or the BIG board itself, there’d be a bit more, shall we say, sensitivity to the sort of “minority” issues typically experienced by people who have been marginalized by discrimination?

Like women?

---

When Leg Spreader was brought to my attention, I duly forwarded the information to the BIG board, reasoning that as we enter the perilous rapids of the 2015 Indiana legislative session, sexist crotch shots with beer bottles might come to be seen not only as disturbing to one’s own conscience; they’d also would not likely be tidiest images to be allowed to define Indiana Beer as we walk the corridors of the Statehouse.

After all, does anyone really want me to be seen wearing a logoed t-shirt like this one to the important annual legislative reception tomorrow?

Yes, I expected differing opinions from the board in response.

No, I did not expect to be outnumbered 11-2 (thanks, Nick), even after offering the suggestion that take no more action as a guild than issue a faux coincidental, non-specific, general statement reaffirming the guild’s commitment to universal principles of non-discriminatory fairness as the legislature reconvenes.

Even this was too much.

We don't need to make statements regarding this type of stupidity. It just draws more attention to them. The guild needs to ignore their tactics and let the consumers make their own choices.

Yes, except we’re a professional trade grouping, aren’t we, and these sorts of entities can have standards, can’t they?

I do not like it either, it’s not my style, BUT... we have no authority or moral high ground to talk to an independent business owner about how he promotes his business … it seems obvious Route 2 Brewing has realized their branding wasn't going to work for them, so they canned it. There is absolutely NO reason to reach out to them with some bizarre I'm-big-brother-and-I'm-watching-you message.

I agree: No reaching out, EVER. But ... guys, we don’t exist in a vacuum, do we?

If we venture into making policy statements about things non-beer related issues do we include drone strikes, child labor, sex trafficking, domestic violence? All of which are horrible, offensive, and much more oppressive than Route 2 Brews poorly planned branding exercise.

Unfortunately, even if we had the time to think about policy statements, there’d be no time to act on them.

I believe we should ignore it, because it is not even close to being the biggest issue on our plate … why are we wasting time on this at all? … issues like this need to be prioritized, and right now this need not be a priority.

Go tell it to Rosa Parks and Dr. Martin Luther King … but wait.

Perhaps I needed a supporting example, so I asked. “What if an Indiana brewery were to attach to a beer an image such as this one from the 1920s?”

Well, yeah, THAT might be considered off-limits – kinda sorta, as long as they're males.

I am in absolute opposition to the Guild having any sort of moral standards being dictated or implied in any manner as part of our mission. Trying to equate racism and sexism, is misguided. No racism is acceptable in our culture (but) a level of sexism is acceptable and it pervades almost every part of our society, every gender (assuming there might be more than 2), and is the basis for whole industries.

So, sexism is acceptable, and whole industries profit from it, although it remains that while Victoria’s Secret is supposed to be about sexy lingerie, since when is “craft” beer supposed to be about spreading legs?

Furthermore, who’s to say that we as “craft” brewers cannot have a higher standard rather than a lower bar?

At least this comment offers hope that my thoughts didn’t go entirely unheard.

I don't believe that policing and judging our membership is part of our mission as a guild, but I do think that we have a responsibility to membership to act on those items and issues that impact our industry as a whole. How we define what those are is for us to decide as we move forward.

Let’s hope we do move forward. As Dr. King once said, "We must keep moving. If you can’t fly, run; if you can’t run, walk; if you can’t walk, crawl; but by all means keep moving."

---

My term on the BIG board ends this year, and I’ll be up for re-election at the annual meeting in March. I understand and accept that my thoughts today might harm my chances of remaining on the board, although this ultimately depends on whether others want to serve. However, my father raised me to speak my mind, and to fight for my beliefs. It’s what I’m trying to do, right now. I'm not at all sorry if it "bugs" you.

Would I have done so two decades ago? Ten years ago? In 2011, when Naughty Girl was brewed for the first time? The record shows I didn’t. But my mind seems to be changing, and now I must be willing to follow where it takes me.

After much deliberation, I’ve chosen to use real quotes, but to pass them along anonymously, because at the end of the day, I enjoy serving on the board, and I respect my fellow board members. More than anything else, the “craft” sexism issue is about a collective mindset, one composed of individual consciences that I hope are evolving. The collective group-think extends far beyond our own board, into the whole of Craft Beer Nation, and I believe that as opposed to a glass of Pilsner, it requires lots and lots of sunlight.

I’m not angry at the individuals on my board. After all, their views are no different from those I’d expect to hear from the man in the street.

Yet maybe – just maybe – that’s an important aspect of this issue, because my board is composed of 13 white males. Typically, they're quite busy. Are we really hearing about racism and sexism?

Maybe – just maybe – this homogeneity causes us to miss a few important social and cultural nuances. Like I said, we get busy.

Maybe – just maybe – we all get so involved with "dollars and cents" issues that we forget about the varied composition of the marketplace supporting our efforts. I have never been in this game for the money, and yet as a closing remark, here is a snapshot of the “craft” beer market, gleaned from survey data captured in 2014, as contributed by Julia Herz of the Brewers Association (thanks TM):

Women consume almost 32% of craft beer volume, almost half of which comes from women 21-34.

Even as our minds are changing, perhaps we could do a better job of thinking with our wallets. How can there ever be an "acceptable" place for sexism in craft beer?