Talk:St. Pauli Girl/Archives/2013

Untitled
"The distinctive label depicting a woman wearing traditional outfits was introduced in the 1800s with the advent of the bottled beer." - Oh, really? Mind adding a source for this? I couldn't find anything like that on the company's website. 217.234.78.74 12:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the curiosity of the brand should be elaborated a little bit. The connotations of text and depiction do not fit together from a German perspective. First connotation of St. Pauli Girl is obviously a hooker as it is the name of the most famous red light district in Germany. It is located in Hamburg (!), the biggest rival of the brewery location Bremen. The logo with its flag like appearance also strongly reminds on the well known soccer club FC St. Pauli which extensively uses pirate symbols. Again this does not fit to the strong partnership of the Bremen brewery with the soccer club Werder Bremen that has traditionally a strong rivalry with the Hamburg soccer clubs HSV and (to a lesser extend) FC St. Pauli. Thus, brand name and logo flag do not correspond to the word "Bremen" but to its hanseatic neighbour/competitor "Hamburg". Finally, the depiction of the girl is completely misleading. The "St. Paul Girl" wears a Southern German/Bavarian dress. This style has no tradition in Northern German cities as Bremen and Hamburg. The so called Dirndl represents the opposite part of Germany in terms of geography (shore and low-lands vs. Southern high-lands), religion (protestant vs. catholic majority), language (Hochdeutsch vs. strong Southern dialects as Bavarian), beer (Pils vs. Weizen) etc. Ok, depicting a real St. Pauli girl would not be a little bit too explicit for US standards but this style does not fit. Ok, in the end it is a Lager beer ... does not fit to the depiction either but ... finally ... to Northern Germany respectively Bremen. Prost! 78.55.107.161 (talk) 09:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The St Pauli Girl article says that Beck's and St Pauli are the exact same beer but with different labels. ??????? If I drink St Pauli from a case to avoid possible green-glass skunking, I can clearly taste the difference between the two. St Pauli has more malt in its flavor for sure. This identical beer claim neeeds to be properly referenced since i do not believe it for a second.Zeno333 15:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

This beer does comply with the Reinheitsgebot. The Reinheitsgebot was written before yeast's role in the fermentation process was understood. Even when it was written, yeast was always present in the recipes for the beers the Reinheitsgebot covered and still covers in Germany (most beers) and specifically in Bavaria (all beers). McGuffinWithCheese 12:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * No, the beer is absolutely NOT brewed according to the 1516 purity law ("Rheinheitsgebot"). Such false claims are routinely made by German breweries, but not one mass-produced major beer is produced according to the 1516 rule, and this has been true for many decades. The 1516 law allows only three ingredients: water, hops, and barley. There was yeast, of course, but it was not explicitly added as an ingredient; it was present in the brewery, in the air, in the fermentation vessels, etc. Modern sanitation was not practiced. In contrast, all modern brewers of mass-produced beer sanitize their equipment thoroughly, and they add carefully cultured yeast to the beer -- clearly not allowed by the 1516 law. Frequently, statements (such as the one from the preceding contributor) are made that the role of yeast was not understood when the law was enacted. That's true. But such statements are also frequently used to support claims that the 1516 law is being followed, and that's absurd.  The fact that yeast was poorly understood in 1516 may explain why yeast is not on the list of allowed ingredients, but that fact in no way supports any claims that any modern mass-brewer follows the 1516 law. It's pure marketing Quatsch, and it's parroted without understanding. ST PAULI DOES NOT BREW ACCORDING TO THE 1516 RHEINHEITSGEBOT. They add yeast, which is not allowed by the 1516 law.


 * Such claims are the norm in marketing, and in fan publications and beer enthusiast websites, but they have no place in an encyclopedia. Unless you can provide evidence that the brewer makes the beer from water, hops, and barley, and adds no yeast or any other ingredient, then the marketing claim does not belong here.4.154.255.3 (talk) 00:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

It surprises me that the list of St. Pauli Girl models is incomplete. Isn't that why Al Gore invented the internet, so people can google hot chicks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.107.67.131 (talk) 21:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)