Lost Abbey Witches Wit: I Thought They Fixed This…

Well here we are again.  I was in Brewforia Beer Market last week and happened across a bottle of Lost Abbey Witches Wit, and much to my surprise the very controversial label hasn’t been changed.  I thought when we discussed this before, over a year ago here on this blog, that this had been resolved.  Lost Abbey was going to change the label and stop offending the pagan community, and really all women in general.

Apparently they changed their minds.  Not only do they sell this beer with the offending label, a quick search of the internet showed me that they used to sell tee shirts with the label art on them.  The tee shirts are no longer for sale on their web site, but I’m betting you could special order them.  Based upon the discussion we had last year, I have changed my opinion on this label design 180 degrees.

Click to Enlarge

When it first came out I was like, no big deal…kind of cool.  However after a lengthy discussion, I’ve come to see how absolutely offensive this label is, and when I saw it, it kind of turned my stomach a bit.  I’m not a big fan of wit beers, so I probably wouldn’t have purchased this beer to begin with, but I will never purchase this beer with this label.  It depicts a despicable act, who would want to drink a beer with this label?  What’s next?  Are they going to have an image of Ozzy Ozbourne biting the head off of a dove and call the brew their Dead Dove Dopplebock?  I wouldn’t buy that either.  Will they have a label of a guy getting drawn and quartered and call the beer Entrails Ale?  No, this truly disgusts me and I think I’m going to cool off on any Lost Abbey, Port Brewing purchases for a while.  But that’s just me.  What do you think?

-Don

Advertisements

Tags: , , , ,

Categories: Beer, News

Join the Madness

Like beer? Like whiskey? Like goofing off? Follow Us!

94 Comments on “Lost Abbey Witches Wit: I Thought They Fixed This…”

  1. November 9, 2011 at 10:27 am #

    Thanks for pointing this out, Don! Hard to believe and kind of irritating.

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 10:31 am #

      I was truly surprised when I saw it on the shelf. Knowing what I know about this now and how this label offends women in general, I can’t believe that people aren’t more outraged.

      • November 9, 2011 at 10:37 am #

        I was outraged/intrigued/conflicted last year….but it’s been a year. Lost Abbey chose not to make any changes, I’ve chosen not to spend my money on the product.

        As women, there are more irritating things to consume our craft brew loving brains like Chick Beer and Animee now. Hopefully Lost Abbey sees consequences for their choice. Not in ranting blog posts, but in their revenues.

  2. November 9, 2011 at 10:28 am #

    Ugh. Did Joe Paterno know about this? #whattoosoon

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 10:32 am #

      A bit too soon Zac. But this is the year for icons to fall! If I were Nick Saben or Les Miles, I’d be worried!

  3. November 9, 2011 at 10:38 am #

    I kind of suspected this would happen after they started walking back their promise to change it. It’s an established product, and it was out for years before people started noticing it as potentially offensive, so I think the brewery is waiting to see if it will just go away.

    I still think there’s something to be said for using a label to call attention to history – even the terrible parts of history – but here the intent is clearly to just rely on people not caring, which is harder to get behind. Still, it’s hard to imagine too many people actually changing purchasing because of it, and there’s not much else to do.

    It does, however, add to my desire to start Persecuted Minorities Brewing Co., and create a beer celebrating pagans.

    • November 9, 2011 at 10:42 am #

      You’d be surprised in regards to changing spending habits. Women in compromising positions (being burned, sexually positioned, etc) on beer labels isn’t cool or necessary to depict historical acts and I choose not to purchase those beers. Thousands of women across the country feel the same way.

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 10:48 am #

      Well Greg, I am going to change my purchasing habits. Not that I purchased a lot of their products before, but they won’t get my $$ any more. I just think it is irresponsible of them to make a bunch of promises, etc, act like they truly understood the compromising position that they were depicting on the label, act contrite, and then just leave everything the same. This is a lot like what happened at Penn State, everyone just hoped this would go away.

      • November 9, 2011 at 10:52 am #

        Whoah, there. This is NOTHING like what happened at Penn State. The actual harming of individuals is not the issue here.

        • Don
          November 9, 2011 at 10:55 am #

          No Alex, I understand that, but the sticking your head in the sand, hoping it all blows over part was what I was referring to. Other than that you are right, no comparison.

        • November 9, 2011 at 11:06 am #

          I am very disappointed with Port/Lost Abbey, since I really love their beer, I just don’t want to make the issue bigger than it needs to be. Yes, there are some parallels in the way it was (not) handled, but there is no need to compare it to something truly awful.

          A similar controversy arose recently with Funkwerks brewery in Fort Collins over their Maori King saison. Some members of the Maori community in New Zealand got wind of it and were offended that the Maori king (a real person who holds that title) was used to sell an alcoholic beverage. The fact that the Maori have a history with alcoholism, coupled with a highly vocal response from people who will probably never see a bottle of the beer in question, led Funkwerks to change the name of the beer.

          If a brewery as small and local as Funkwerks can do this, why won’t Lost Abbey? That said, I will still probably buy their beer, because I am a bad person. 😉

        • Don
          November 9, 2011 at 11:30 am #

          Alex, that is a very interesting story about Funkwerks, and one I was unaware of. I guess they are just a little more sensitive to other peoples thoughts and feelings than LA. If I were you (and I know you aren’t a bad person) I would think about what might be a suitable replacement brew every time you look at a LA beer. If you can find something, gerat. If not, oh well I guess you support the terrorists. 😉

        • November 9, 2011 at 12:16 pm #

          Here’s a link to a story about the controversy:
          http://blogs.westword.com/cafesociety/2011/08/new_zealands_maori_people_blas.php

          And Funkwerks’ Gordon Schuck’s response:
          http://news.tangatawhenua.com/archives/13657

          I think they handled it very well.

          If Port and Lost Abbey can agree to make less interesting and original beers, I will gladly take my beer dollars elsewhere.

  4. Dave
    November 9, 2011 at 10:53 am #

    I’ve always loved the label. I’ll just go with if you don’t like it, don’t buy it. Same with if a movie or show bugs you. Don’t see it or watch it. There are far worse beer labels out there that should offend woman. Just saying.

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 10:57 am #

      Name them. I know that some labels objectify women and certainly the BMC commercials do as well, but I’m thinking none are worse than this.

    • November 9, 2011 at 11:00 am #

      Offensive labels are offensive labels…I don’t necessarily give them a degree of offensiveness. What bothers me most is that breweries think it’s okay. Last time I checked, I’m a consumer and one who won’t bat an eye at dropping $200 on a pair of shoes or $50 for a bottle of beer (Dark Lord Pappy aged on Pappy Van Winkle Barrels) so maybe not depicting my gender as a sexualized or burning prop would be in their best interest.

      • Brien
        November 9, 2011 at 11:22 am #

        You buy Dark Lord? That label contains the image of a dead animal on it, not to mention that the character is clearly offensive to men; telling us that we all have to be big hulking monsters. Buying this beer honestly seems to support the cartooning of males in society while at the same time supporting the killing of animals. Dark Lord is just as offensive as the Lost Abbey beer, and I personally will buy neither.

        • Brien
          November 9, 2011 at 11:29 am #

          And yes, I know the Pappy bottle are different, but I am specifically asking if you purchase regular Dark Lord, and why (if you do) that label is ok. This question can go out to anyone as well. I buy no beer that has any cartoons, characters, sexualization of either gender, etc. I wonder if the rest of you do, and why those are OK, but this one particular beer is so much worse?

        • November 9, 2011 at 11:29 am #

          I bought Pappy Van Winkle Dark Lord which features a pipe smoking crown wearing skull but I don’t see any dead animals.

        • November 9, 2011 at 11:37 am #

          I don’t buy Dark Lord with my own personal money. Yes, I’ve bought it for friends, my husband buys it but I personally feel that Three Floyds marketing is awful. I choose not to support them.

          I actually didn’t know that there was a dead animal on the label of Dark Lord. Thanks for the heads up!

        • Brien
          November 9, 2011 at 11:44 am #

          So you are purchasing bottles of Dark Lord, supporting stereotypes and giving massive amounts of cash to a company with a marketing campaign that you yourself do not like, and even buying special bottles of their releases, while also buying tickets to the event and essentially supporting the business. You justify *that*, but the Wit label is the one that is offensive and needs to be boycotted.

          I am not picking on you, just pointing out the stance of too many people in the beer scene today. This is wrong, and we need to work as a community to see to it that we don’t justify being pandered to in any way. I don’t want cartoons on my beer. I want beer!

        • Don
          November 9, 2011 at 11:53 am #

          Neither Jim or myself have ever tasted any 3 Floyds stuff, and can’t get it, so we haven’t ever come across the issue. We did both, however get to taste Dark Lord at last years rare beer tasing and thought it was just kind of Meh. I wouldn’t buy it based on its flavor as much as I wouldn’t buy it based on the label, although I’ve never even seen the label.

          I like your points Brian. Stereotypical depictions of anyone, woman or man should be avoided if possible.

        • November 9, 2011 at 1:07 pm #

          Although I personally agree with everything Three Floyds does, it’s not my place to keep others from making the decision for themselves. I gladly use my allotment of Dark Lord for friends who enjoy it and don’t have the opportunity to attend Dark Lord Day. I’m already attending (for free). A mental check would put my Floyds purchases at about $300 over the past five years. Seeing what others spend on them, I don’t think I’m the consumer they care about.

          Living in Indiana, there are times when Three Floyds is the best option available. Would I rather drink Mad Anthony or Flat 12 Bierwerks? Yes. Is that always possible? No. Three Floyds beats a Budweiser any day and there isn’t really a right and wrong answer.

          Every company is going to do some things you may not agree with. At the end of the day, it’s what you decide to spend your money on that counts.

        • John King
          November 9, 2011 at 1:41 pm #

          Ms. Mullins pretty much sums it up in her last post.

        • Brien
          November 10, 2011 at 1:18 am #

          I get it, and don’t fault you (or anyone) from buying what they want to buy, but ranting against one label, while purchasing and supporting the other just seems odd to me. But, you’re not alone, I see lots of people get angry and rage against labels that are offensive to them, while fully supporting offensive art that they themselves need or want. For most of us, its always OK to make fun of the “other” as long as we are not being made fun of.

  5. November 9, 2011 at 11:01 am #

    Wow – Zac has turned Archie Bunker here into a feminist! This is the greatest win for the cause since they started burning bras!

    Also, I think they said they’d consider it, which they might have. Apparently they decided “screw you, ladies.” Nice. 😦

    • November 9, 2011 at 11:03 am #

      Technically it was “screw you witch ladies” but yeah…. 😉

      • Don
        November 9, 2011 at 11:06 am #

        I love this! I do a post and Tamre takes care of all the comment replies! That is awesome. Tamre, you got the job! I’m gonna go hang in the employee lounge and drink coffee! Yippie. 😉

      • November 9, 2011 at 11:07 am #

        No technically it’s not “screw you witch ladies” because an accurate look at history will tell you that a majority of women burned at the stake weren’t even pagans or wiccans! Once hysteria sets in, it’s a hard thing to grab hold of and rein in. So technically, it is “screw you ladies”. They get none of my beer money. None.

        • Don
          November 9, 2011 at 11:12 am #

          I agree. I was talking with my son last night who quoted me an alarming number. More people were killed for being Pagan or witches in the US and Europe during the middle ages than were killed by Nazi Germany during the Holocaust. Perhaps that is another label idea, Holocaust Hef? It is clearly offensive and should be changed.

        • November 9, 2011 at 11:12 am #

          I meant “screw you witch ladies” in regards to Lost Abbey’s non-change and referring to Vicky Noble, a pagan and the woman who highlighted this issue in her Times piece last year. *sorry*

        • November 9, 2011 at 11:16 am #

          Like I said, Don, technically it’s “more people were killed for being THOUGHT to be pagan or witches…” Many of them were, but many of them weren’t and were just a casualty of hysteria.

        • Don
          November 9, 2011 at 11:25 am #

          Katie, it was clearly a tool that was used to keep women in their place. Mostly it was outspoken confident women that had this as their demise, not pagan or witches as you stated. So yes, for the record this is the argument that tipped this over in my mind a year ago. The witch burnings weren’t about witches or pagans, they were about systematic and horrible oppression of women.

  6. Dave
    November 9, 2011 at 11:05 am #

    You can say Brown Angel or Sexual Chocolate could piss some women off. Let me ask you this. Witchs Wit looks like the cover of a Death Metal Band Album. If you saw it on their im sure it would just be passed up. I just don’t see the issue here.

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 11:08 am #

      Well Dave, I really don’t listen to Death Metal, and today 99% of all music is digital, so album art is a thing of the past. If you like the beer, drink it. I’m just saying I’m not going to.

      • Dave
        November 9, 2011 at 11:11 am #

        Drink it on draft so you dont have to look at the label =) Oh and Hi Don.

    • November 9, 2011 at 11:15 am #

      Anytime women are sexualized on beer label art is a bad thing. It doesn’t matter who is offended by the artwork, it matters that it’s happening. Women who drink great beer enjoy it just as much as men do, so why the artwork depicting busty unrealistic playboy bunnies? I don’t want to see that, I want to drink my beer and appreciate the work (including art) that went into it.

      • John King
        November 9, 2011 at 11:52 am #

        So does mean those woman sexualized on the Fabio-esque books my grandmother and other 80 year old woman read are a bad thing?

        • November 9, 2011 at 11:54 am #

          I think those books in general (and Fabio specifically) are a bad thing!

        • November 9, 2011 at 1:09 pm #

          I think that most of the artwork was probably done by men and the idea is for women to escape into those books and become the heroine. Hello, Twilight. The lead female character is a shell with zero personality so readers can become her in their minds.

        • John King
          November 9, 2011 at 1:40 pm #

          I’d have to read Twilight to know what you are referencing.

    • Jae
      October 15, 2013 at 11:08 am #

      I am a female and purhased this beer as a gift for some female friends, specifically because of the name and the label which I thought was pretty cool looking. Are we blind to the fact that witch burning happened some time ago and was a part of our history, good or bad. If women were still being burned at the stake indiscriminately today, then I can see your point. Would you call upon a ban for a movie whose plot involved the burning of witches and whose movie ad poster depicted such….probably not. Too many other atrocities happening today to make a big deal out of this. Don’t buy it if it offends you. Move on.

  7. November 9, 2011 at 11:08 am #

    Let me start by saying something that some will find offensive and that is: You can always find someone who will be offended by a thing–any thing! I personally could be offended by this because one of my ancestors was accused of witchcraft back in 17th Century CT, but I think that’d be stretching things a bit.

    Having said that, I would think, since this particular label has been the center of controversy before, that the brewers would be sensitized to the issue. I therefore suspect, that there may some backlash principle at work, i.e., a group of folks who buy the beer (and wear the t-shirts) specifically because its offensive. Add to that the bad rap that Wicca, and Paganism as a whole, have gotten from Christian Europe/America, and a measure of sensitivity on the issue is understandable.

    As for its historicity, its always good to remember the atrocities of the past, so that (hopefully) we don’t repeat them. But we don’t have to celebrate them, which this label certainly seems to do.

    Finally, the best offense in cases like this is to do what Don is doing, that is to vote with your feet (and your wallet). If it offends you don’t by it, then let the company know unequivocally that you’re not buying their product and why.

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 11:21 am #

      Well said Wayne. I agree they should be sensitized to the issue. Hopefully they will read a bit and get a little more educated as to the real impact of the Salem Witch Burnings and change this label.

  8. November 9, 2011 at 11:24 am #

    Here are a couple of labels where women are depicted as objects of desire. At least they aren’t on fire:

    Clown Shoes:
    http://www.clownshoesbeer.com/tramp/

    New Albanian
    http://beernews.org/2011/06/new-beer-labels-struise-new-albanian-cigar-city-and-more/

    • John King
      November 9, 2011 at 11:56 am #

      I know the guys behind New Albanian and there artwork very well. IMO they do no different than a Bud Light add showing women in bikinis. Also, throughout time, mermaids have tended to be depicted as half naked beautiful creatures through time, sometimes with seashell bras..sometimes without.

      Mer-man Dad! MER-MAN!

      • Don
        November 9, 2011 at 12:04 pm #

        You’re gonna lose that argument pretty quickly. http://www.newalbanian.com/nabcsite2008/tafelbier.html

        • November 9, 2011 at 12:06 pm #

          Hooray boobs!!

          I mean boo!!! That’s awful!!

          I had to look like three times to fully explore my disgust.

        • John King
          November 9, 2011 at 12:25 pm #

          Yea my wife has actually been mistaken for her when I pour for them.

        • Don
          November 9, 2011 at 12:29 pm #

          With a touch of Plastic Surgery? 😉

        • John King
          November 9, 2011 at 12:50 pm #

          They are real Don, and they are fantastic.

        • Don
          November 9, 2011 at 1:11 pm #

          I’m certain you would know, and we’ll leave it at that! 😉

  9. November 9, 2011 at 11:50 am #

    I should also add (slowly pulling the pin from the grenade) that I think the label is a provocative piece of art that I really like (tosses grenade, ducks behind desk).

    That said (raises white flag), it doesn’t belong on a beer label.

    Still, the faceless crowd, the erotic look on the face of the woman, the moon illuminating the cross on the medieval church, all add up to make it a thought provoking image. The imagery is interesting and makes you think about gender roles, the dark side of religion, the dangers of the mob mentality, the fundamental power of fire, etc. That’s what art is supposed to do – provoke a response.

    It’s just in the wrong place, where it sends the wrong message.

    Witches Wit

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 11:57 am #

      I don’t think anyone was vilifyingthe artist for his work. All your points are well taken. But to put this so cavalierly onto a beer bottle, and then refuse to change it once it is pointed out to you that it is degrading and demeaning and inappropriate is really what this post is all about. Not the art, but the brewery and their lack of a response.

      • November 9, 2011 at 11:59 am #

        Agreed, but I happened to look at the good pic of the label we had from last year and remembered how much I liked the artwork, so I thought I’d mention it.

        I also put the good pic in the post above, so people can get a good look at it (not that your camera phone pic wasn’t top notch there, Ansel Adams…)

  10. Craig
    November 9, 2011 at 11:56 am #

    I’d love to find a beer with Ozzy biting the head off a bat on the label. Maybe a name of Bat Shit Crazy DIPA!

    • November 9, 2011 at 11:58 am #

      I’m right there with you, Craig!

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 11:59 am #

      Yeah, as long as nobody calls PETA that’d be ok?? 😦

      • November 9, 2011 at 12:00 pm #

        Even PETA is like “screw bats – they’re scary!!!”

  11. November 9, 2011 at 12:01 pm #

    Did you think to reach out to the brewery for comment, Mr. Big Time Beer Bloggger?

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 12:13 pm #

      just did via twitter.

  12. Brandon
    November 9, 2011 at 1:27 pm #

    I am also kind of surprised they kept the label. I had one last year and really enjoyed the beer. Will it keep me from buying another bottle this year? Nope. Will I ask myself another question? Probably. So is anyone REALLY offended? What does that mean anymore? Do you lose sleep? Does it distract you from casting a spell? I’d venture to guess that 90% of the beer drinking pop will not be offended by the label. Chalk this up as marketing 101.

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 1:35 pm #

      I would chalk this up as a marketing mistake. A label that repels anyone on principle should be one that is changed. It is just bad business. I think it should be changed, but I’m not the one who gets to make that decision.

  13. Michael
    November 9, 2011 at 1:37 pm #

    Everyone, including me, has become too thin skinned. Blame it on Fox News.

    • John King
      November 9, 2011 at 1:40 pm #

      DAMN FOX NEWS!!!!!

      • November 9, 2011 at 1:54 pm #

        I would sell my soul (to Lost Abbey?) if I could guarantee Sheppard Smith went away forever.

    • November 9, 2011 at 1:41 pm #

      Michael,
      is it being thin skinned or treating consumers with respect? I laugh at Tosh.0 and take some pretty good swipes at Girls Pint Out (my baby) occasionally. A sense of humor is fine, objectifying people is not fine in my view.

    • November 9, 2011 at 2:20 pm #

      Don only watches Bear News. Mostly about the latest trash can technology and how those gaddammed free-spirited fornicating white tail deer are ruining Abearica.

      • John King
        November 9, 2011 at 2:35 pm #

        quote of day. and Don hates those god damn Rangers.

        • November 9, 2011 at 2:44 pm #

          But he LOVES those pic-a-nic baskets!

      • Don
        November 9, 2011 at 2:47 pm #

        What the hell is wrong with you?

  14. Michael
    November 9, 2011 at 2:31 pm #

    Tamre, I think whoever said vote with your wallet is right. It’s just depicting an historic event. I just think this is too big a deal to make over a label. I even disagree with Don when he says that a label that “repels anyone on principle should be changed”. So, I guess every label, word, book, tv show, etc.,etc. that repels anyone on principle should
    be changed??

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 2:47 pm #

      No, I don’t think everything should be changed. Clearly there is a LOT of offensive stuff out there. I think that 1) the company should be put on notice that the label is offensive, and 2) that some consumers won’t buy their product because of it. Then, since this is a free society, they have to make their choice. This situation is a little more convoluted than that because last year when this all came to light the company did say that they would make a change, and then did not. So in principle I think companies should honor their word, and not just shine people on, as seems to be the case here. So on what we can agree is that I will be voting with my wallet and they won’t get any of my beer money.

    • November 9, 2011 at 2:48 pm #

      I think this is a label we can all get behind…

      Generic Beer

      • November 9, 2011 at 2:49 pm #

        Actually the more I look at it, the more I feel “fluid” and “ounces” are being repressed by abbreviation…

      • November 9, 2011 at 2:51 pm #

        I find the use of all-caps offensive. It’s like it’s shouting at me!

        • Matthew
          November 9, 2011 at 2:56 pm #

          I find it’s whiteness irritating. It’s repressing the contribution that people of all colours have made to beer.

        • November 9, 2011 at 3:04 pm #

          These are all very good points…

          What about the font selection? It’s kind of pedestrian, no? Like it’s saying that only simpletons would consider buying beer.

          This beer is calling me stupid, and that’s hate speech!!

        • November 9, 2011 at 3:22 pm #

          And what, pray tell, is wrong with simpletons? I come from a long line of simpletons, going all the way back to the old country.

        • November 9, 2011 at 3:24 pm #

          Aha! The label also creates social tension and unease!

    • November 9, 2011 at 2:57 pm #

      Michael,
      I agree voting with your dollar is the best way to be heard as a consumer. I understand humor won’t be appreciated on all levels. I am just not in favor of breweries using beer label art to marginalize a group of people. I believe that beer label art can be provocative, stimulating, humorous or evoking without sexualizing or tormenting women (or any group of people). If craft beer is all about the quality and the product, as much time should be put into the label art to create something that is gender neutral and still engaging.

  15. Matthew
    November 9, 2011 at 2:55 pm #

    I really couldn’t care less. I think some perspective is required. It’s a label on a beer bottle. One you’ll only see if you happen to be lucky enough to be in Lost Abbey’s distribution area. I really think we need to chill out with this whole making sure nobody is offended thing. Some wacky religious group are getting up in arms because they’re being portrayed badly on a piece of paper 4″ x 3″ and a couple of t shirts. That’s what it boils down to for me.

    Furthermore, to the people who think they should change it: what should they change it to? A witch a la Macbeth? Wouldn’t that then imply that all Wiccans are haggard, old women? Or should the company scrap all the time and money they’ve spent into developing that brand and change it up entirely?

    In my opinion, it’s a storm in a teacup. There are bigger things to worry about.

    • November 9, 2011 at 3:06 pm #

      I’d like to see Elizabeth Perkins here, back in the early B&W days of Bewitched. She was pretty awesome back in the day. Twinkle-twinkle!

  16. Michael
    November 9, 2011 at 2:57 pm #

    I think it comes down to how many won’t buy because of the label. The label is not offensive to me. I won’t buy it only because it cost too much to ship it and my local merchant doesn’t carry it. If enough people find it offensive, ie don’t buy the beer then
    I’m guessing they will change it. If the notoriety that blogs like yours have given it make it sell like crazy I’m guessing they won’t change it. I know from a blog (I think last year) that the Wiccans don’t like it but many on the site seemed not to be bothered by it. I also know they got a ton of anti emails. However, a few people with a lot of hate can generate a server shutdown. Follow the money.

  17. FatCatKC
    November 9, 2011 at 3:30 pm #

    I agree with Jim I think the art work is awesome! I don’t think it is intended to repress women or any other nonsense. It is simply representing a point in time in history which is depicted in the picture. Nothing more nothing less. It is important to remember the past so as to not repeat it as one other commentor stated.

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 3:33 pm #

      Really? Are those sort of heady messages best placed on a beer bottle? I think someone thought it was cool and didn’t think much beyond that and now can’t admit a mistake. Lookin’ at you Tomme. 😉

  18. John King
    November 9, 2011 at 3:39 pm #

    This wasn’t an issue when REPUBLICANS WERE IN OFFICE!!!!!!!

    • Don
      November 9, 2011 at 3:45 pm #

      Amen Brother…Oops that was a religious reference…Doh!

  19. Michael
    November 9, 2011 at 3:50 pm #

    Censor Wickipedia. They have pictures of men and women being burned painted, drawn or etched in the 16th century.

  20. November 9, 2011 at 4:40 pm #

    In the end, it’s just beer. I look forward to trying it and judging it on its merit as a beer, assuming I can find it in Cambridge or London.

  21. November 9, 2011 at 5:41 pm #

    Ok, here goes, the pedant strikes again.

    Tamre has raised an important issue, one that shouldn’t be pooh-poohed as silliness. She said that the label, and ones like it, objectify women. She’s right, they do.

    So why do so many companies use sexually alluring women in their ads? Doh! Because it gets the attention of about 35% (+/-) of our population, i.e., heterosexual males (especially young ones).

    Now one could say that this response is reprehensible, but the truth is that the response itself is hard-wired. The male sexual trigger is primarily visual. He is genetically keyed to recognize certain visual cues and ratios as sexually alluring, cues and ratios that indicate that the female image–the “object”–being presented is a good choice for mating. (This is something that women seeking not to be objectified may want to keep in mind when choosing clothing, shoes, makeup, etc.)

    But, though he can’t help the reaction, a man can and should, as an intelligent, thinking, responsible being, be able to temper his response to same (its easier if he’s older cause then the brain in his head is more likely to take precedence over the one in his pants). In other words, Just because he is a dog doesn’t mean he has to act like one.

    But he should also be able to buy a bottle of beer, regardless of labels, w/o feeling as though he’s betrayed his mother, sister, wife or daughter by doing so. The question to ask is did he buy the beer because of the label, or because he likes the beer. Based, on personal experience, I have never let the label art determine what beer I buy.

    • November 10, 2011 at 9:56 am #

      That was really insightful, Massugu. Label art is where I feel brewers need to step up to the plate. Men make up 35% (+/-) of the population, so marketing should be thoughtful to not turn off the other 65% of the population!

      Women make up 80% of purchasing decisions across the board, including beer. http://www.amazon.com/Marketing-Women-Understand-Increase-Largest/dp/1419520199/sr=8-1/qid=1172535273/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-8242004-9630402?ie=UTF8&s=books

      Women are the largest growing segment of craft beer drinkers. It would behoove breweries to consider label art that doesn’t speak to heterosexual males consciously and subconsciously. Two brands I’ll point to who do it right are Bell’s and Founders. They have created award winning beers without using marketing ANY beer drinker would be ashamed of. Most craft beer fans aren’t familiar with Flat 12 Bierwerks yet, but you will be eventually. The same goes for them – they even asked for women’s input on the women’s restroom at the brewery! F12 went out of their way to not coddle women, but include them and make them feel comfortable.

      Girls Pint Out promotes women to learn more about craft beer and look past funky labels to what’s in the bottle. We are all for responsible drinking by responsible adults. If you take a look at our photos (http://www.facebook.com/GirlsPintOut?sk=photos) we’re your wives, sisters, girlfriends, and neighbors. The fact that I have to say “look past the half naked woman on the bottle” is what’s irritating. I shouldn’t have to say it. If all beer drinkers are equal (a line I hear all the time) and breweries just want to make good beer for good people (I hear that all the time too), then they should make good marketing decisions for everyone who drinks their beer and no one – men or women – should have to feel ashamed or question themselves on buying and supporting craft breweries.

  22. oliver klosoff
    November 10, 2011 at 12:36 pm #

    I had to check the “about” section as I’m kind of new to this blog. I am shocked to see that it lists Don as the conservative one.

    • November 10, 2011 at 12:38 pm #

      You should read the original post about the label from last year. He was in fine conservative form in the comments.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: