Hi friends! Happy Wednesday! This week I have a Supreme Court case for you about sexism in bartending. Let’s get to it!
Valentine Goesaert
Hop in your time machine to 1947. People were spotting UFOs, Jackie Robinson had just signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers, and the Cold War was starting to get real chilly. But that wasn’t enough for Michigan. They decided to pass a law that said all bars in towns with over 50,000 people must be licensed by the state. Sounds harmless, right? Lol, no. The catch with being licensed by the state? Women couldn’t be licensed by the state unless they were the wife or daughter of the bar owner. Ahh, there it is. That sexism we know so well.
The Michigan Bartenders’ Union thought that in order to maintain their prestige they needed to exclude women. There were a lot of sexist ideas that women shouldn’t be bartenders because they weren’t better conversationalists than men (lol), it corrupted their womanhood to work in bars (double lol), and they weren’t as good as men at controlling drunk people when they got rowdy (classic). We all know that’s bullshit and the real reason was they didn’t want women working stereotypically male jobs and “taking” jobs from men. That’s the fun thing about sexism, they have the same motivation for every (claps) single (claps) thing (claps).
During the war, bars were forced to hire women because so many men were overseas. Once they got back, the women wanted to keep their jobs and the union wanted a way to nip that in the bud. So, they lobbied to get a shitty law passed that essentially barred women from working in bars (see what I did there?) unless they were closely related to the male owner. The female bartenders and bar owners of Michigan didn’t take this lying down. Enter Valentine Goesaert, a woman who owned a tavern in Dearborn, Michigan whose daughter, Margaret, worked behind the bar. This law told her she couldn’t get a license for her own bar which she already owned and she would have to fire her own daughter as her bartender! Goesaert and twenty-eight other women sued the Michigan Liquor Control Commission claiming this violated their rights under the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause. This case was a big deal because it was the first time someone argued that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex. Did I mention they were represented by a female lawyer, Anne Davidow? We love to see it.
Sadly, the female barmaids and bar owners lost their case in both the Michigan courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. You can read about the Supreme Court case here, it was Goesaert v. Cleary. The Court basically said Michigan had good reasons for the law and it didn’t completely ban women from being bartenders, so it didn’t significantly limit women’s employment. Amazing that a group of old white men didn’t see any problem with this law. Like, I’m really, truly shocked.
After the Supreme Court loss, Goesaert and the other women knew what they needed to do, get the law repealed. They founded the Michigan Barmaids’ Association and organized, lobbied, and annoyed the hell out of the legislature. With the help of Anne Davidow (their lawyer), they finally got the law repealed (yay!). For the olive in their victory martini, the sexist jerks at the Bartenders’ Union begrudgingly allowed women to become members. Cheers to the badass Michigan women who fought the system and won!
In Other News
The Washington Capitals got a puppy. His name is Biscuit and he had made my whole week with his cute puppy face. The only men I will ever highlight in this newsletter are dogs. Please enjoy.
That’s all for this week. Catch ya next Wednesday!
Citations
“How Women Fought for the Right to be Bartenders” JSTOR Daily
“Famous Women in Drinks History” by Imbibe Magazine
“Ruling to Protect Women” New York Historical Society