Fighting ignorance.
From Wikipedia: Malt liquor, in North America, is beer with high alcohol content. Legally, it often includes any alcoholic beverage with 5% or more alcohol by volume made with malted barley. In common usage, it refers to beers containing a high alcohol content, generally above 6%, which are made with ingredients and processes resembling those for American-style lagers.
BTW, my understanding is that “malt liquor” was a post prohibition holdover. Nowadays, in the craft beer section, it’s extremely common to see beers that are above 6%. They no longer need to be labeled as “malt liquor” (at least in the states I’ve been to). I’m guessing Schlitz, Mickey’s, etc keep the malt liquor name as branding and not as a legal requirement.
Lord almighty, that “beer” sounded vile.
Wow, I thought I’d never be able to compete with the real beer adventurers here, but I think mine is at least in the running.
The most unusual beer I’ve had was a curry beer. Seriously, it was flavored with Indian garam marsala spices and that’s exactly what it tasted like. [Can’t remember who made it, but from the US I’m pretty sure].
The second bottle sat in our fridge for I think six months until we could pawn it off on some unsuspecting friend of ours. It’s not that it was horrible – I’ve definitely tasted far more unpleasant things – but it was just so much the opposite of what you want in a beer. It was like the opposite of pesto or gin and tonic: two tastes that were somehow made worse by combining them, even though a meal with garam marsala and beer in separate dishes is great.
The most unusual beer I’ve ever had is Gösser Dark (Austria). It is very sweet. I sometimes call it a “dessert beer,” an obvious play on sweet dessert wines. Once you get over the shock, it’s pretty good, but I wouldn’t drink it often.
A few other posts also mention sweet beers, but I won’t link to them. I respect the person who found the concept anathema, but as they say, “your mileage might vary.”