Bill’s Johnson Keeps It Up

Cat porn

Looking at pussy! (Oh, come on! You know I had to say it!)

Bill Johnson of the American Decency Ass. is continuing his relentless pursuit of porn.

His little tirade of a few days ago got picked up by the acme of journalism, OneNewsNow. And by “acme”, I mean:

Pronunciation: \ˈak-mē\
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek akmē point, highest point — more at edge
Date: 1620
: the highest point or stage ; also : one that represents perfection of the thing expressed
synonyms see summit
—Merriam Webster


Everything they produce is a failure.
—Wile E. Coyote

The ONN article quotes BJ:

“This is their latest venture into these dirty waters,” Johnson laments. “And we’re just very concerned that, once again, if Calvin Klein…doesn’t hear in a very strong way from concerned people — Christians — …that they will continue this kind of usage of sexual perversion to toy [with] and lure vulnerable consumers.”

Others see a simple jeans billboard. BJ sees this:

Free erection sign

(Photo from Roger Balettie)

In the comments to my previous article, Barbara said:

One of the things I love is how stupid fundies are about simple things.

They state “A side note: Calvin Klein has hidden their contact information quite thoroughly. We have not been able to find a fax number nor a web contact page nor an email address for them”

It took me less than a minute on CK’s website to discover they are owned by the Phillips-VanHeusen corporation, a quick google for the PVH website which gives both a fill in email form and a phone number to call for information, and I am sure if they have a published email address or fax number, you can get it when you call for information.

Don’t worry, Barbara! We know that BJ can keep it up (his pursuit of this info, I mean). The ONN article quotes him:

Johnson says his organization has put some time and effort into finding the correct contact info for Calvin Klein and has posted that information on their website.

The more time he’s wasting looking for contact info that normal people can Google in a minute, the less time he has for restricting our freedoms.

I guess one of BJ’s latest toys…

The Intruder

…no, not one of those toys! I mean latest web toys is a survey plug-in for his website, so he has daily surveys. In a recent email he sent me (I can’t find these results on his site, though), he gives these results:

Response to survey question:

Do you equate Calvin Klein with quality merchandise or smutty advertisements?

8.2% Quality merchandise. I pay little to no attention to how or what they advertise.
78.1% Smutty advertisements. Their manner of advertising is a real turn off for me
13.7% CK’s merchandise is quality and their advertising is smutty.

Somehow, I doubt that Calvin Klein’s latest ads are targeted at BJ’s demographic. I’m sure they’re not worried about these results.

Today, OneNewsNow has an update on this situation. Apparently Calvin Klein caved into the pressure (boo! hiss!) and removed the billboard. ONN quotes BJ:

“Well, we are encouraged that the 50-foot display of group sex was removed from the building in Manhattan,” he shares. “[But we’re] not pleased that they still are using a 50-foot display of a very scantily clad woman on that very same wall… And the greater concern is that on their website [there] still does remain a group sex display.”

Again, if somebody is able to find actual porn on the CK website, please let me know. This quote illustrates the problem. To BJ, a skimpy outfit is pornography. How can anybody be that troubled by seeing women not wearing burkas? Is this guy wearing a Viagra patch?

Erections are always happening at the most inopportune times!

Here is what BJ writes on his website:

Disclaimer – proceed with caution. Some of you especially struggle with such displays. It can set you up for the wrong kind of thinking.

This is for documentation only. It is raw and ugly. CK is guilty of advertising perversion and untold numbers will be negatively effected.

Web display of group sex:

“Negatively effected”, as in actually enjoying life.

30 Responses to “Bill’s Johnson Keeps It Up”

  1. Robert Madewell Says:

    Some of you especially struggle with such displays. It can set you up for the wrong kind of thinking.

    You know, if I believed that a sky monster was reading my thoughts ready to zap me if I have a little bit of fantasy, I’d worry too. Good thing I don’t, huh.

  2. Barbara Says:

    Using a special email account I keep for purposes such as these, I submitted an answer in the poll on the Ass.’s website.

    The results thus far?

    Your vote has been successfully recorded.

    Today’s Question: Calvin Klein is using a group sex display on the web (and earlier on a billboard) to build controversy and increase sales. Does that work with you?

    25.0% No! I will not spend money with Calvin Klein.
    50.0% Yes. I think it’s cool! CK uses contemporary means to attract people like me.
    25.0% I’m indifferent. If I like a certain CK product, I’ll buy. If I don’t, I won’t buy.

    I am sure that because 100% are NOT agreeing with the first answer, the answer from BJ will be “liberal pro-gay anti-family tree hugging liberals got all of their like minded friends to answer and skew the poll.”

  3. Thomas Says:

    Yet while demonizing Calvin Klein this person has nothing to say about the CK advertising from three decades ago that involved sexualizing a fifteen year old girl.

    Strange how that works out.

  4. Kevin Says:

    Actually, I think BJ may have one of those…

  5. J. A. Baker Says:

    CK is guilty of advertising perversion and untold numbers will be negatively effected [sic].

    Epic Grammar FAIL, BJ!

  6. Lindsay Says:

    I’m going to have to research this. Did CK really take down the billboard due to pressure from BJ & Co or was it because their lease was up/wanted to change it for a new ad campaign/other factors not related to “group sex?”

    As a side note, I think that billboard is how BJ would like to imagine group sex being. I would love for someone to put up an actual billboard of what group sex really looks like. Ck would all of a sudden look PG.

  7. Ron Britton Says:

    J. A. Baker:

    Thanks for pointing that out. I was 90% sure he used it incorrectly, but I didn’t have time to look it up.

    Also, that bit about “effect” being both a noun and a verb always trips me up. Supposedly the verb form is rare, but I use it all the time.

    At work, somebody thought that I had written a certain paragraph. I said “It couldn’t have been me. I would never say ‘wrongly’.” The other guy said “‘Wrongly’ is a word!” I said “Sure, but I would never use it. I would say ‘incorrectly’.”

    I have no idea why I use one and not the other. I do effect changes all the time, though, so I can never remember if I affected the effect.

  8. Sarah Trachtenberg Says:

    Heh heh, calling it “American Decency Ass.” instead of “association”
    I haven’t seen CK’s latest ads, but don’t know that I’d call them pornography. I find them offensive for other reasons, but wouldn’t really describe them as smutty. To CK’s credit, he’s at least trying to be artistic, not sleazy. I still hate the messages he sends, though…and how the press showered him with so much free publicity that he uses being offensive as an effective marketing tool!

  9. R. A. VanderStel Says:

    As much as I think Johnson and his organization are simple-minded, he’s right in this case. There is absolutely no need for an advertisement like this to be on public display – ever; and I certainly don’t need my seven and four year old daugthers to see it. They are going to be taught that if they are to be married someday, then there is one man and one man only who will be there for them. This garbage runs counter to everything that is PROPER, and if you don’t see that then all of you can go fuck yourselves.

  10. Ron Britton Says:

    My my. Rather than engage in a dialog about whether the CK ad is appropriate for public display, R. A. VanderStel chose to just profanely dismiss all of us, using language that he wouldn’t want his daughters to use. Sterling example you set there, VanderStel.

  11. Ron Britton Says:


    I agree that the ads are racy, and whether they are appropriate for public display is certainly a discussion worth having. Community standards come into play here. New York city is extremely tolerant of suggestive imagery, so they are probably fine under those standards. If they exceed local standards, then it is up to the people of New York City to determine that and demand their removal. It is not appropriate for some sexually-repressed fundie blowhard from a tiny all-white Michigan hick town to tell New Yorkers what they can look at.

  12. OtherRob Says:

    I’m torn about this ad and ones like it. As a generally libertarian-leaning and free-speech loving person, I tend to be opposed to removing it. As the parent of a 10-month-old baby girl and 8-year-old boy, I don’t want them seeing it.

    The problem (or at least risk) with engaging in a debate about whether it should be taken down is that I don’t want to come off like R. A. VanderStel…

    And speaking of R. A….

    …I certainly don’t need my seven and four year old daugthers to see it. They are going to be taught that if they are to be married someday, then there is one man and one man only who will be there for them.

    Does that mean he wants them to marry the same man? 😉

  13. R.A. VanderStel Says:

    Engage in a dialog? This is really cut and dry here. CK has nothing better to do than appeal to the lowest common denominator. I like good-looking jeans as much as the next American consumer, but how about an ad that shows some creativity behind it? Instead of impressing upon the public that CK’s bosses are a bunch of perverts, how about something tasteful and clever. I’m not against sex appeal per se, but that’s just ridiculous. Finally, about that “fuck yourselves” thing? You’re right – I wouldn’t want my daughters to say that: I wrote that for shock value only. I hope you weren’t offended.

  14. Bill's Johnson Says:

    Hey, I just noticed that American Decency site has added a comments feature to each posting. Unfortunately, it’s looking quite sparse in the comments department. I would encourage everyone here to give ol’ Bill a little love and add your thoughts (or in my case, fantasies). If anything, we could have a contest to see whose comment took the longest amount of time to be deleted! Bill’s good at deleting them.

  15. Ron Britton Says:

    B’s J:

    They’re braver than I thought. A lot of delusionals won’t allow comments (ARN and the Discovery Institute come to mind).

    For anyone leaving comments over there, please don’t be too rude.

  16. sue blue Says:

    I’d much rather have my daughter see a display of bare chests and people kissing than people getting their heads blown off or their guts splattered against a wall. Funny how the Guardians of Public Morals get their panties in a wad about seeing a hint of boob or genitalia, but never think twice about violence their kids are seeing in movies, TV shows, commercials, and video games every frigging day.

  17. sue blue Says:

    Also, we could take a hint from European TV – full of T & A, including full-frontal, but a whole lot less blood and guts. To them, it’s violence that is obscene, not nakedness.

  18. Parrotlover77 Says:

    then there is one man and one man only

    Or maybe one woman…

    I know, I know. Don’t feed the troll.

  19. Parrotlover77 Says:

    CK has nothing better to do than appeal to the lowest common denominator…

    That’s sort of a weird statement. I’m sure he has plenty of better things to do. Like going to the bank and counting the massive amount of money he’s making.

    As a generally libertarian-leaning and free-speech loving person, I tend to be opposed to removing it. As the parent of a 10-month-old baby girl and 8-year-old boy, I don’t want them seeing it.

    Yea, I hear you. I’m one of those child-free freaks and perhaps that has tainted my views a bit, but I’m tired of the attitude of society having to walk on eggshells because some little kid might accidentally see something that offends their parents.

    Let’s get this straight. No single billboard is going to make your kid a sexual deviant.

    Now, there is a correlation with the western norm of all female models being unrealistically touched up and skinny which may drive down the self-esteem of perfectly beautiful girls and women. I get that, I promise I do. And I understand the argument against it.

    However, if your one year old or even seven year old or even teenager saw that billboard, it’s going to not make a damn bit of difference in the way they approach their sex life. Body image, maybe (as stated above).

    I really think this sort of stuff upsets some parents more than it will ever “damage” the child.

  20. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I should have finished reading the comments before posting all mine! Sue blue hit the nail on the head!!

  21. R.A. VanderStel Says:

    I’m a troll because I posted my opinion on an open forum? A troll is generally referred to as someone who posts short, hurtful, derisive comments strictly to make people mad or get a rise out of others. I find myself very irritated by you calling me that. If you want to call me something, call me an asshole. I can deal with that.

    Basically, what it boils down to for me is, I’m going to great lengths to ensure my kids can hold onto their innocence for as long as possible. The world around them, more often than not, is an ugly, evil place and, ultimately, I can’t shield them from that. However, this soft-core ad (while I don’t live in NYC, but if I did) would interfere with my hopes for their childhood. And I hate the idea of just accepting that.

    Now, if they saw it would I all of a sudden live in fear that they would grow up to work with a metal pole on a stage or appear in an orgy-based XXX film? No – I’m not that deluded as is Bill Johnson and his army of zealots. And, if I had to choose if my kid accidentally came across this ad online or a beheading video from Iraq, I would pick CK’s ad in a heartbeat. Viewing the latter will defintely damage a part of your soul. I would cry if they saw something as horrific as that.

    Say what you want about me, but just know that I put my kids first as they are growing up. Troll that.

  22. sue blue Says:

    A few years ago, National Geographic magazine had a story about Denmark (written by Garrison Keillor of Lake Woebegone fame) that featured a picture of a family sunbathing in a park. Mother, father and toddler were all naked as the day they were born. Apparently in Denmark, it’s considered completely natural to be au naturel. Maybe Bill Johnson and his coterie of concerned moralists can do a followup on the kid in the picture and find out if he’s morphed into a scarred, mommy-hating pervert yet. As for the picture itself, Nat. Geo got zero complaints about it, as far as I know.

  23. Jeff Eyges Says:

    Sue, conservatives in general don’t like talking about Western Europe, and fundies ignore it completely. Its very existence disproves all of their assertions. European societies are largely socialist, and most Europeans are atheists, theologically liberal or simply disinterested in religion – yet they enjoy all of the liberties we have here, and at the same time have universal health care, education that’s often largely or entirely paid for, far fewer social problems, etc. Unfortunately, we can’t have it the same way here, not because these systems are unworkable, but because we’re selfish assholes.

    Honestly, if the few people I care about weren’t here, I’d move there in a heartbeat. Of course, due to the interconnected nature of the global economy, we’ll almost certainly be taking Europe and the rest of the world down with us – so I suppose it doesn’t really matter any more.

  24. Parrotlover77 Says:

    …call me an asshole…

    You’re an asshole.

    …I’m going to great lengths to ensure my kids can hold onto their innocence for as long as possible.

    As I said earlier, “I really think this sort of stuff upsets some parents more than it will ever ‘damage’ the child.” QED. Thanks.

    If you want your kids to maintain “innocence” forever, then lock them in a room with The Little Mermaid on a permanent loop. Meanwhile, let the rest of us enjoy CK’s soft porn. Oh yea baby!

  25. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Jeff – I would also add that their middle class is much larger than ours and despite an enormous tax burden (frequently exceeding 50% of income), their cost of living is actually lower and quality of life higher. Of course, their upper class does share a larger burden of taxes than the USA, so it is more difficult to become a gagillionaire. That is an incredibly small price to pay…

    I agree with you, Jeff. I would love to live over there myself, but all my family is in the states and I would really miss them. Plus, it would be pretty difficult to go through the immigration process and get a job over there. Also, I have this burning sense of patriotism in my gut that tells me that staying in the states and fighting for my beliefs and against ignorant fundies is the right thing to do.

    Maybe I’ll reward myself later in life and retire in Amsterdam. 😉

  26. Jeff Eyges Says:

    Oh, Amsterdam. Did you know, someone (it’s always “someone”, isn’t it?) did a study recently, and decided that the Dutch are the happiest people in the world? I saw a segment about it on 60 Minutes, or somewhere – they confess to having “lower expectations”, so they’re far more content with what life gives them. Of course, the fact that life’s basic necessities are taken care of cradle to grave doesn’t hurt, either. They interviewed one young man who was in grad school. He and his wife or partner had just had a baby, and the government was paying him to take off I don’t how many months to care for it.

    My nephew, who became Hasidic (don’t even get me started), and who is, obviously, something of a Jewish fundie (although he doesn’t think we’re all going to hell), just came back from a year in Germany. While he was there (on a sort-of internship), he went all over Western Europe, and he can’t stop talking about the differences between their cultures and ours. He told me things even I didn’t know. He’s come to see America from an entirely different perspective – and it isn’t a favorable one.

    I want to waterboard George W. Bush.

  27. Lindsay Says:

    Don’t forget, much of Western Europe has quite the problem with fundie Muslims and unemployment.

    My husband is British, and we’ve have the discussion quite often of where we want to live in the coming years. The cost of living is relatively expensive (especially if you live in a place where you need to own a vehicle…cars owners are taxed to death) compared to the US. There are some social issues regarding the Muslim community and the ASBO’s (the anti-social youth culture) and the British National Party unfortunately seems to be gaining strength. There is still some remanants of the Victorian class system that exist in their society as well.

    here are great draws…for example a good high school education is still worth it’s salt and you don’t have to go through another several years of university to find a decent job with decent wages. The NHS…though it has its faults still is better than having no or crappy health insurance. Except for some of the remoter corners of the country public transit is pretty good. More vacation time and the ability to travel to foreign countries easily.

    I think what I’m trying to get at here is Western Europe isn’t necessarily paradise and they have their own sets of problems…there is much to admire in their societies but I think sometimes they are viewed through rose colored lenses.

  28. Jeff Eyges Says:

    I don’t think Britain is doing as well as the continent, frankly. Eleven years of Margret Thatcher took its toll.

    I know the Europeans are having problems with Muslim immigrants. It’s still a better place to live – for the time being. Conversely, America is finished. We’re never coming back from this. Start learning Chinese.

  29. sue blue Says:

    And how about Norway? If you can take the winters, it’s paradise. At least 70% atheist, cradle-to-grave healthcare, jobs for just about everyone, no wars, no assholes like Bill Johnson telling people what they can and can’t see. Happy gay people, happy, healthy kids, no one getting their tits in a tangle over marriage, abortion, what sky fairies to worship, or any of that crap that so many Americans seem to think is the be-all and end-all of existence.

    And to think my great-grandparents left the place. Of course, back then America supposedly had the goods. My, how times have changed.

  30. Parrotlover77 Says:

    I think what I’m trying to get at here is Western Europe isn’t necessarily paradise and they have their own sets of problems…there is much to admire in their societies but I think sometimes they are viewed through rose colored lenses.

    Certainly not paradise (truly, is there such a place where everything is perfect? I don’t think so), but for the basic sorts of things that I look for in a society I want to live, they are closer to my ideal than where I live now.

    It seems that the “American Ideal” is basically work your fingers to the bones on two or three jobs to pay for all of life’s necessities and put your kids through college while going into massive debt.

    Despite my admiration for somebody doing just that to make ends meet and make a better life for their kids, that is not a goal society, as a whole, should expect upon anybody!!