When did Sacramento have its first woman bartender? More recently than you might think

The all-male California state Supreme Court 86’d some sexism on May 27, 1971, deciding to allow women to tend bar. In the state capital, one young woman immediately poured one out: Tina Barton was identified the very next week as the first sanctioned female hire.

“I’ve always liked the bar business, and I’m proud to be the first female bartender in town,” Barton told Karen Vitlip of the Copley News Service. “It’s a good life.”

Section 25656 of California’s Business and Professions Code had barred bartending for women. There were two exceptions: A woman could make and serve drinks if she was married to the owner or if she herself owned the bar.

The women guilty of the crime and the individuals who hired them could be punished with a fine of up to $100, three months in jail, or both; bars where they worked could have their liquor licenses revoked.

The state constitution prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of sex, and, the 1971 Supreme Court ruling said, that law did “not admit of exceptions based on popular notions of what is a proper, fitting or moral occupation for persons of either sex.” The federal 1964 Civil Rights Act also outlawed sex-based employment discrimination.

In court, the state attorney general defended the California prohibition, arguing that a male bartender had to be present to protect patrons. He also argued that the law as it stood protected women from being injured by drunken customers.

To the argument that the law protected women, the justices shot back, “The pedestal upon which women have been placed has all too often, upon closer inspection, been revealed as a cage.”

The court ruled that the “desire to protect women from the general hazards inherent in many occupations cannot be a valid ground for excluding them from those occupations. … Women must be permitted to take their chances along with men when they are otherwise qualified and capable of meeting the requirements of their employment.”

And, the court said, “It is clear that bartending is a lawful vocation, that women are as capable of mixing drinks as men.”

From her nightclub in Sacramento, Barton agreed.

“I’ll tell you,” she said in 1971, “I know what I’m doing and I know what makes a good bartender.”

Barmaids wanted

Barton, Vitlip wrote, was 23 and “115 pounds of curves” (in a sign that the court case did not immediately end sexist double standards, the reporter included the young woman’s hip, waist and bust measurements in the news story).

Barton worked at the Driftwood, an East Sacramento nightclub at 3308 C St. She got behind the bar within a week of the Sail’er Inn, Inc. v. Kirby decision. In the following weeks and months, many other bars in Sacramento began advertising to fill positions with women, sometimes placing ads for “barmaids” among the listings for babysitters and bakery salesgirls.

In an ad from January 1972, the Buckaroo Club, at 8631 Folsom Blvd. west of Watt Avenue, said female applicants “must be attractive between age (sic) of 21 & 29, no experience necessary.”

Though sex-based employment discrimination for bartenders was illegal, Barton predicted that she’d encounter more overt sexism from the drinking public. She said she expected that 60% of her customers would treat her courteously, and that “the rest are going to be out to challenge me…to see if I’m as good as a man.” She added, “They’ll probably order weird drinks on purpose.”

Some people, she said, would be “appalled” to see her.

The attorney general himself may have been appalled to see 23-year-old Barton mixing drinks at the Driftwood. The court said he argued that women who were “unrestrained by husbands” and weren’t under threat of losing a husband’s or her own liquor license would be more likely to “commit improper acts” behind the bar.

As Barton put it during her first week on the job at the Driftwood, “Just because I’m a bartender doesn’t mean I’m going to turn into a rowdy.” The Copley News Service reporter was quick to point out that the young woman didn’t even really drink that much.

During Women’s History Month 53 years later, the attorney general’s claims seem laughable.

And The Sacramento Bee reported on their flimsiness a year later: The paper ran a column one year after the law changed, and the male columnist quoted two people — both men — saying that women bartenders seemed to be doing just fine. The writer, Tom Arden, spoke with Bud Batman, secretary of Local 600 of the Bartenders Union. Batman estimated that 50 women were working as bartenders around Sacramento, 13 of whom had joined the Bartenders Union.

The deputy director of the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, Peter Saxton, told Arden that women hadn’t caused any enforcement problems in the state.

Barton could have predicted that for him.

“I think it’s just great to have a woman behind the bar,” she said right after she started.

However, it appears that no reporters followed up with Barton a year later, so it’s unclear how many customers challenged her on the minutiae of cocktails. In 2024, a reporter was unable to locate her. Nevertheless, cheers to this pioneer of vice.