The cynicism around Beyoncé’s SirDavis whisky says everything about the naysayers

Unless you’ve tasted it and genuinely dislike the profile, there’s very little reason to dismiss Beyoncé and Moët Hennessy’s SirDavis release. Here’s what’s really going on.

Tuesday 20 August was a monumental day for whisky. One that I haven’t seen the likes of in my 12-plus years writing about the spirit. A first-of-its-kind joint venture screamed across the scene with the subtlety of a jumbo jet engine. This was the impact of SirDavis, the new American whisky joint venture between Moët Hennessy and Beyoncé herself.

Beyoncé. Singer. Songwriter. Actor. Entrepreneur. To many, she is a superwoman. One of the most famous people on this earth, She has been called "the most important and compelling popular musician of the twenty-first century" by The New Yorker. She needs absolutely no introduction. And now she’s thrown the warehouse doors of whisky wide open with the development of SirDavis.

What’s SirDavis anyway?

Just in case you missed the cacophony earlier this month, SirDavis is a 51% rye, 49% malt, MGP-produced American whisky (the ‘e’ is dropped for the brand) that’s finished, blended and bottled in Texas. That finishing involves ex-Pedro Ximénez casks, which add a whole heap of dark fruits and clove spices to that unusual rye-malt profile. It’s called Sir Davis after Beyoncé’s paternal great-grandfather Davis Hogue, a moonshiner during Prohibition. And Glenmornagie’s Bill Lumsden was enlisted to develop the recipe. 

It’s a genuinely fascinating whisky. I got to taste it at a secretive press preview in early July. There’s an intriguing depth to it, with warming cinnamon on the nose, baking spices and dates and figs in a velvety mouthfeel on the palate, and a soft, but by no means unsatisfying honey-spice finish. It’s well-put together and intentional, gentle enough to attract mass appeal but with enough complexity to hold the attention of seasoned sippers. In short, it’s a great whisky. It’s genuinely innovative, ticking a number of world-first boxes. So why the flood of negativity on social media?

It’s not about the whisky

Something that interested me most about the vast majority of the negativity I saw surrounding the launch of SirDavis is that it had nothing to do with the whisky. How could it? I very much doubt that any of the vitriolic commenters had actually tasted the release. As far as I understand, it was shared under embargo, NDA even, with a small group of journalists and writers. Don’t judge a whisky pre-tasting. (And for the avoidance of doubt, it’s ALWAYS ok to dislike a whisky post-tasting. No-one is under any obligation to enjoy anything. If a dram isn’t for you, just move on to another. No big deal.)

So if it isn’t about the whisky, what is driving the cynicism? Most of the comments I saw were about Beyoncé’s celebrity status, that she didn’t know anything about whisky, that she didn’t even like whisky. Then there were those that claimed that her involvement was nothing special. Celebrity women had ‘fronted’ whisky brands before, what sets this apart? 

Misinformation or misogynoir?

I’m not here to defend Beyoncé. CLEARLY she is doing just fine. But I do think that it’s worth examining what the drivers behind these comments are. Because if it isn’t the whisky in this instance, it’s almost certainly the woman. And while Beyoncé won’t see the vitriol, other women will.

I think there are three things going on: misinformation, misogyny, and misogynoir. And they are all connected.

Let’s start with misinformation. Beyoncé isn’t ‘just’ a celebrity ambassador. She’s not bought into an existing brand. It’s a 50/50 JV between herself and Moët-Hennessy. This is a business. It’s an entrepreneurial move. I saw comparisons made between her and Mila Kunis with Jim Beam. Kunis was appointed as a “spokesperson”, and her work defied conventions of women and whiskey at the time. It was 2014, and it’s estimated that her presence helped drive sales by 43% in the UK (according to its own financial reporting). But she wasn’t a co-founder. She was essentially an ambassador. There’s a difference.

Then there’s a general fatigue around celebrity spirits launches in general. This I understand, to a point. It feels like every week there’s a new tie-up, endorsement, campaign. But it’s not often there’s this level of vocal discontent. 

Here’s a solution. If you don’t like celebrity spirits – don’t buy celebrity spirits. Guess what? Many people do like them. Celebrity spirits aren’t new, and there’s a reason they keep coming out. The ones with authenticity behind them (more on that shortly) tend to do well. And what’s bad about that? Sometimes we forget that whisky is a business. It is good when a brand is commercially successful. And Bey is a savvy businesswoman. With SirDavis, she’s spotted an opportunity and she’s gone for it. That’s what Diageo, Pernod Ricard, Brown-Forman, Moët Hennessy, and all the drinks groups do every day. 

So then there’s the big question. Where was the uproar surrounding Jenson Button’s Coachbuilt, or even Sam Heughan’s The Sassenach? This is where we get onto misogyny and misogynoir.

Comments on social media called into question whether Beyoncé knows much about whisky, and if she even likes it. We just don’t hear this levelled at men who launch whisky brands. Ever. Beyoncé posts about whisky tasting (she did in April). She sings about whisky, too. (Just one example on 2016-released Lemonade track 6 Inch: ‘Her Yamazaki straight from Tokyo’. There are many more.) Whisky is a long-term interest of hers. This launch feels authentic. She’s just entered the reality of what it is to be a woman in whisky much of the time.

And then there’s misogynoir. It’s a term coined by Black feminist writer Moya Bailey in 2008, referring to misogyny specially directed toward Black transgender and cisgender women in popular culture. Much of whisky remains very white. There are clear parallels here to when Beyoncé released country album Cowboy Carter earlier this year. A Black woman singing country?! Radio stations and critics in the US panned it (spoiler alert: it’s great). It was dismissed as “not authentic”. I feel we’re seeing a similar narrative play out here in another white-dominated industry: whisky.

Essential extra reading: Gabrielle Nicole Pharms has explored the topic of misogynoir in whisky for Sweet July. It is an excellent piece. 

An opportunity for self-reflection

There are two complaints that I’ve seen about SirDavis that fall outside this framework. One is that it eclipsed other whisky releases hitting the shelves that week. That the powerhouse celebrity launch stole the limelight. That’s unfortunate, and akin to a renowned musician putting an album out the same week as Taylor Swift – or indeed Beyonce’s Cowboy Carter. It’s frustrating of course. It also speaks to our wider cultural fascination with celebrities as brands in a capitalist society – but that’s a discussion for another time. 

Similarly I heard some legitimate rumblings about the SirDavis liquid being submitted to awards bodies anonymously. Most – if not all – insist on disclosure. This grievance also makes sense. An entity that you considered a peer getting a leg-up when you’re playing by the rules always stings. But criticism outside of these kinds of arguments feels like a complaint based on something else – and that requires self-reflection.

Why is there so much disquiet about Beyonce and SirDavis? Why hasn’t there been when other celebrities have been involved with whisky brands, in whatever context? Why is this making people angry? Where’s the negativity stemming from? Because, until pre-orders are fulfilled in early September at least, it’s not about the whisky. 

Again, Beyoncé isn’t going to read those comments or hear the negative discourse. But women in whisky will. Black women in whisky will. Instead of the positive impact SirDavis can potentially have of widening the category and inviting more people in, that will be the legacy instead. This isn’t about not critiquing a whisky launch. It’s about making sure that commentary is rooted in places other than misogyny and misogynoir. And that’s where everyone can play a part. For so long women have urged people to speak up against gender biases and microaggressions in whisky. Well, here are a load of problematic sentiments bright as day. Whether they go unchallenged or not is ultimately up to us.