Why Celebrate Underrepresented Breweries—Plus a Programming Note
Listen to this article:
This is a Beervana audioblog. Please forgive verbal stumbles and fumbles. And, when you’re done listening, consider a pint from Beervana’a partners: Guinness Brewing of Dublin, IE and Baltimore, MD, pFriem Family Brewers of Hood River, Oregon, and Reuben’s Brews of Seattle, WA. Their support makes this site possible.
Let’s begin with that programming note. I’ve given the Diverse Breweries database a permanent home on the website here (found under the “Posts” drop-down menu), and there is also a link at the top of the website’s splash page. The database is managed as a Google Sheet, and moments after I update the original file, it updates the version that appears on the website, so it’s always up to date.
When I posted it for the first time on Monday, the database had about 135 breweries listed across six categories. Thanks to the help of dozens of you, we’re already up to 240. No doubt this only scratches the surface, but it’s a great start. You can contact me with updates via email or any of the social media channels I maintain. Keep ‘em coming!
Why Celebrate Underrepresented Breweries?
Onto the second item. Yesterday, Paul left the following comment, and I think it’s worth taking the time to answer it seriously.
What is the specific utility that you see in aggregating this list? If you (yes you, Jeff) decide to take a vacation to say, Eugene, what effect does the gender or skin pigmentation of the person making the breweries’ beer have on your itinerary? How does that intersect with the word of mouth or hype you’ve heard about the quality of the breweries on your list? Are breweries with female and/or non-white brewmasters somehow at a disadvantage for that detail?
How about 10 Barrel? Where would you place that in the stack, considering the competing elements of the Portland location being driven by an amazing brewer who happens to be a woman, and the competing narrative that no one should support that place because it’s owned by a conglomerate? Do we get a beer there because it’s made by a woman, or do we decline because it’s corporate? My sense is that the quality of the product should be the thing that matters most in both regards.
Your beat is obviously beer, but do you apply this equity standard evenly? Who made the carpet in your home? Did you check that data base? What about the tires on your car? What about the light switches in your home? Are they equitable?
There’s a lot going on in this comment, and I’m not going to get into carpets or corporate beer, which aren’t germane to Paul’s central point, which boils down to these two sentences: “What is the specific utility that you see in aggregating this list? … My sense is that the quality of the product should be the thing that matters most.”
For 44 years, small American breweries have argued its critically important to consider who makes the beer. It was a cornerstone of the Brewers Association’s mission. Very few consumer movements have been as laser focused on identity as American craft breweries. Breweries and member organizations (the BA but also guilds and regional associations) have spent a huge amount of time highlighting local, small, and independent—all elements of their identity. Quality has been a distant benchmark for this industry, so much so that a few years ago the Brewers Association felt it needed to do some remedial work in encouraging breweries to consider it. From the personalities of owners/brewers to punchy marketing to irreverent branding and messaging, craft brewing has always been about identity.
For the first time in decades, people from underrepresented groups are founding breweries. Click through the websites in my database and look at how old the listed breweries are. The vast majority are less than five years old. I find it a little strange that we would only now ask drinkers to ignore who makes the beer after having spent decades focusing on them. Of course it matters who makes the beer, and of course we all care. Celebrating new, distinctive voices is exactly what we have been doing forever.
The barriers to getting into this business are far higher for members of communities who have less access to resources. For an overview, I encourage folks to listen to Garrett Oliver talk about why Black brewers are underrepresented. It’s not a mysterious, unknowable riddle. It’s structural, financial, cultural and bureaucratic. It’s not just Black brewers and owners. I’ve spoken to a lot of women, and even now, even in a place like Portland, sexism remains a major issue in the industry. A woman’s path to becoming a head brewer is a lot rockier than a man’s.
Acknowledging these facts in no way diminishes the accomplishment of White, male brewers. Our celebration of Tonya Cornett does not come at Ken Grossman’s expense. We don’t live in a binary world.
And let’s not forget that identity is far more often an obstacle than an advantage for these brewers. For every drinker like me who wants to celebrate the achievements of the brewers who have overcome these obstacles, there are others who continue to hold bigoted views and just want them to go away. Putting themselves out there is an act of bravery and grace and I admire the hell out of them for that.
So, to answer your question: the specific utility I see in celebrating breweries founded by women and Black, Latino, Asian, Indigenous, and LGBTQ owners, as well as the head brewers who develop and make the beer, is that there should be a lot more of them. They’re members of my community and I want them in this industry. I want to see those structural barriers fall.
I choose the word “underrepresented” intentionally. It would be great if at some point in the future the range of brewers and owners is as diverse as our country. But we’re nowhere near that place, and the only way we get there is by acknowledging how much it does matter now.