Today Thu Fri
It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 10:00 PM EST on February 08, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
2°/-2°		 It is forcast to be Clear at 10:00 PM EST on February 09, 2012
Clear
5°/0°		 It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 10:00 PM EST on February 10, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
6°/-15°

32 Comments

news

Sue Johanson Retires Sunday Night TV Show

By Marc Lostracco

Sue Johanson is da bomb
After six successful years on the Oxygen network south of the border, flawless Toronto septuagenarian sexpert Sue Johanson is ending her TV call-in show Talk Sex. The show was the most popular late-night draw for the network, receiving 100,000 attempted phone calls per episode, but the 77-year-old registered nurse, lecturer, and sex therapist felt it had become tiresome working the 11 p.m.–1 a.m. time slot for more than three decades.
Talk Sex began airing in 2002 on the Oxygen network, spun-off from Johanson’s famous local TV program, The Sunday Night Sex Show—itself originating in 1984 as a radio show running for fourteen years on Q107. The novelty of a grandmotherly figure comfortably using words like “queef” coupled with the educator’s wealth of knowledge, insight, and advice was a recipe for success, gaining fans from Oprah Winfrey to David Letterman. The final TV show on Sunday will count down the year’s top ten sex toys.
Johanson is an avid lecturer (reaching 47,000 university and college students annually), and despite shutting down the show, she isn’t retiring from the speaking circuit. She is also the author of three books and continues to write for the Toronto Star. An early trailblazer for sexual health education, Johanson controversially opened Canada’s first high school birth control clinic in 1972 at Don Mills Collegiate Institute. The qualified expert received postdoctorate education at the University of Toronto, the University of Michigan, and the Toronto Institute of Human Relations, and was awarded the Order of Canada in 2001. She has even developed a line of sex toys and counseled prison inmates.
Talk Sex and The Sunday Night Sex Show now appear in more than twenty countries around the world, and more than four million Americans tune in to the program every Sunday night. The only request Oxygen made of Johanson for U.S. audiences was not to say “cock ring,” as she was wont to do on the Canadian version. American ears are sensitive like that.
Images via Oxygen.

Comments

  • David E

    On one TV program, she was asked if there is a difference between Canadian and American callers.
    She stated that Canadians are more knowledgeable and ask more intelligent questions.
    I’ve not seen her program on the American network but I do know that there were many well thought questions and callers who were open minded on the Canadian program.

  • WannaBinToranna

    As an American (sorry), yeah, I gotta admit, you guys are smarter and much more open-minded than this country.
    That’s why some of us want to move up there.

  • Marc Lostracco

    Well, teen pregnancy and STDs are rampant throughout the U.S., sexual health programs are removed from schools on religious grounds, and the President pulls funding for any sex ed that isn’t abstinence-based, but hey, don’t say “cock ring”—that’s offensive!

  • Doggiez

    Sue Johanson is vile. I had the unfortunate experience of working with this woman years ago, and she is extremely difficult to work with. There are many reasons publishers wouldn’t touch her work.

  • Mark Ostler

    She taught me so much. Love those dolls she used to demonstrate positions.

  • David Newland

    She’s pretty feisty, for sure, but her bold efforts to inform and educate particularly young people have undoubtedly prevented pregnancies, STDS and heartbreaks by the thousands.

  • David Topping

    Doggiez: I don’t believe you.

  • Marc Lostracco

    She’s a legend, and didn’t receive the Order of Canada for nuthin’.

  • Doggiez

    David,
    Without giving away too many details — or me getting too heated and wanting to take a swim in the libel pool — it is true. You can choose to not believe me if you like. I have no issue with her efforts to educate youngters about “safer sex” (no, not “safe sex”), but her attitude. My opinion is that yes, she has done some good work over the years. However, professionally, she is a nightmare.

  • andrew

    Wow, that must have been some damn bad experience for so many qualifiers. She’s “vile” and a “nightmare” [at least, professionally]. Come on. We’re on tenterhooks. You’ve already dipped yr toe in the libel pool. Why not at least wade a little in the shallow end? For our sakes, doggiez: brave the waters!
    I remember getting way inundated with info listening to her on Q107 either before or after they ran comedy. I always appreciated that she had a no-nonsense approach on-air, was compassionate with her listeners, and proffered advice that was generally meant to encourage safer and happier sex lives.

  • Marc Lostracco

    I’m curious too. I can’t imagine how much nonsense she has to put up with from the “huhhuhhuh, she said penis” crowd, and I suspect her “attitude” problem may come from her looking like a sweet grandma, but actually ultimately being a no-nonsense social worker that doesn’t have time for bullshit.
    Plus, when your name is a brand, and your brand needs to be handled incredibly careful because of what it involves, I would expect her to be “difficult to work with” if she disagreed with how she was being presented. Johanson walks a very fine line with a subject that has to be handled with kid gloves, and she’s been brilliant at maintaining that consistency and focus.

  • andrew

    Heh heh. He said penis. Heh heh.

  • Doggiez

    Gentlemen, we’re free to disagree, but even considering my lousy experience with SJ, I would never call her a legend, puhleeze! Gordon Lightfoot is a legend. Dittio Leonard Cohen, Dr. Norman Bethune, Pierre Trudeau, Nellie McClung, Norman Jewison, yadda yadda. But Sue Johanson?!
    (and no sarcastic comments about the “history lesson.” Hey, I’m here to help:)

  • Green Sulfur

    This is typical of Doggiez. He lights a fire and then runs when it gets too hot. Put up or shut up.

  • Doggiez

    Dear Brown Methane (sorry, “Green Sulphur” — I couldn’t resist :)
    I run away from nothing, my friend. Never have, never will. The dreaded Sue Johanson incident involved a potential book she was working on which died a painful death due to her — shall we say — difficult nature. Since I do not wish to engage in libel, I will leave it at that.
    My apologies if Mr. Topping doesn’t believe this to be true. Again, I do not have anything against Ms. Johanson or her cause; in fact, she has done a lot of great work in the field of safer sex education, and I applaud her for that. My issue comes from dealing with her one-on-one in my previous publishing capacity. Do I feel she deserved an Order of Canada? No, but that is my opinion which, as I have stated, is qualified by working with her on a project which ended badly. I believe it is possible to differentiate my opinions of her. Is she good at promoting safer sex? Yes. Do I respect her for that? Yes. Do I like her? No.

  • Amanda Buckiewicz

    My mom ran into her in the grocery store once. She says she was the nicest lady she’s ever met, and they had an amazing conversation about whipped cream.
    And then my mom winked at me.
    Needless to say, I didn’t ask for details.
    Anyways, being a woman in the professional world, I can imagine she’s probably had to become a bitchmobile a few times. We all do. It’s part of the fun of having ovaries.

  • Green Sulfur

    Look Doggie Doo, if you think by telling the truth you’re being libelous, you’re wrong. Libel is when you lie about someone/thing. So either you’re trying to smear a great Canadian or you’re dumb as a door knob. It’s probably both.
    Frankly, I don’t care about your opinion of Johanson. You could hate her for all I care. It’s your insistence that Johanson has done something so reprehensible that if you were to talk about it you’d get sued. BS. You’re just spineless.

  • Doggiez

    GS:
    Umm, err, OK? If you don’t care to read my opinion of her, then don’t read it. Are you a lawyer when you say you “lie” about someone, or just plain fucking stupid?!
    Libel, slander, look it up, genius. One is written, the other, spoken.
    Moron.

  • andrew

    I think he may be onto something; if you believe that what you have to say about Johanson’s behaviour in a professional environment is true, then you aren’t libelling her if you say it – of course, the other party can initiate a suit stating as claim that you are defaming them. Then the onus is [I believe - I am not a lawyer and no expert in torts] [torts! i love the word!] on you to prove you are not. You may even initiate a counter suit, reversing the claim, from what I understand, and claim damages. Civil claims are tortuous [hee hee! tort! tort!! tort!!!] and expensive. That’s why they are so often engaged in by wealthier parties because the prospect of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and years in court is daunting.
    What you’ve done is safe, and by no means do I fault you for protecting your assets – but it’s all too easy to snipe from the sidelines and then claim risk of legal action as a defense from publishing more than what basically amounts to innuendo and rumour. If you can’t say something nice…

  • Tyson Che

    I continue to be amazed by how many Canadians have bought into the hype that is Sue Johanson, self-proclaimed Queen of Sex Education. She is nothing more than a smut- peddler, and should be ashamed of making a career promoting pre-marital sex to underage children. Her own husband left her years ago because of her intolerable behavior. Torontoist posters like Marc Lostracco remind us that Ms. Johanson received an Order of Canada: “She’s a legend, and didn’t receive the Order of Canada for nuthin’.” There was a huge amount of controversy surrounding just how much Ms. Johanson deserved her Order of Canada appointment, and I still believe she is undeserving of such an honour. Let us not forget that anti-Semite David Ahenakew was also awarded am OOC.
    Stop buying into Ms. Johanson’s self-proclaimed “grandmotherly” image, and think for yourselves. This promoter of porn does not deserve any more attention or accolades.

  • Marc Lostracco

    Satire?

  • tripper

    “Satire?”
    God, I hope so.

  • Green Sulfur

    Wtf are you talking about? There’s nothing incompatible with what I wrote in my last comment and the definition of libel. You do know it’s possible to tell lies about someone in print, right?
    Face it buddy, you’ve been outted as a liar. You should be sued for libel right now based on the factless innuendo you’ve used in a thinly veiled attempt to bring down Johanson’s professional reputation.
    But hey, maybe you get off on making senior citizens look bad. I bet Sue could help you understand that side of you better.

  • Doggiez

    Dear GS,
    Go away. You have no idea what you are talking about. “Outed as a liar”? What is your big interest in SJ, as a user of her line of butt-plugs?

  • Tyson Che

    Regarding Green Sulfur’s comment: “Libel is when you lie about someone/thing.”
    That’s quite the oversimplification, and you couldn’t be more incorrect. There is no “lie” in libel per se [I laughed out loud when I read this, thank you for my morning chuckle]. Libel is a written statement that defames or attacks another, which exposes them to public contempt and lowers their estimation in the community. By stating that the root of “lie” is libel, you are revealing your obvious youth and inexperience. But that is OK for someone who must be a high-school student.

  • Green Sulfur

    I didn’t realize we were expecting an essay on the meaning of libel. Of course you can go a thousand times deeper into the meaning than I did (or you did, for that matter). Thousands of Canadian lawyers spend countless thousands of hours writing and presenting legal arguments on this topic annually. I was scratching the surface with a definition that is hardly incorrect.
    But tell me this: Who has ever been successfully sued for libel after writing a truthful description of an entity or individual, notwithstanding violations of privacy that are reasonably expected?

  • waitwhat

    If you’re going to tell us that working with sue is a nightmare, there’s an expectation that you will tell us stories. We need stories, dammit!

  • Tyson Che

    I remember reading a story about 10 years ago (in Quill & Quire or Masthead, as I remember) that talked about an aborted book project with Ms. Johanson. This is probably the one Doggies is writing about.
    As for SJ, my impression of her remains the same: negative. This woman isn’t a legend at all; she’s a marketing wiz who has very carefully protected her real self behind a fabricated “grandmotherly” image. It would be nice for Torontoist do do some actual research on stories, instead of merely clipping and culling them from other sources.

  • Marc Lostracco

    The article was on her 24-year-old show ending—not a searing exposé on the devastating lie that is Sue Johanson.
    I’m baffled how people are discounting such an accomplished career in sexual health education, based on what? Personality conflicts? Hangups about her teaching sex-ed to young people? I’ll bet that hundreds of thousands of people have learned more accurate information from Johanson over the last three decades than their parents, friends, or wishy-washy school system.
    I still have yet to read any satisfactory evidence that she’s evil, despite the bitter claims by two of you. Sour grapes?

  • andrew

    Well, given that Tyson’s primary comment was that SJ is a “smut-peddler” and a “promoter of porn”, I have been ignoring his comments. I like smut. I like porn. I think that sex, one of the most important activities humans engage in, and certainly one of the most fun and pleasurable and rewarding activities, should be discussed freely and openly. SJ used language that I heard my classmates use when I was 14. Our sex-ed health nurse person did not, even though she demonstrated putting a condom on to our glee. But Johanson’s open, frank, and disarmingly positive discussions about the risks, myths and rewards of sex came in language that I found accessible. She told younger callers that they shouldn’t be ashamed for wanting pleasure, for being queer, or for health issues – I never counted, but for damn sure I heard a lot of young girls calling in freaked the hell out about some sort of discharge that they thought meant they were dying or diseased. As a matter of fact, although Johanson provided amazing advice to young males, she was a firece and uncompromising feminist, telling women of all ages that they deserve to be treated fabulously, that no one should ever hurt them, that sex should be fun and pleasurable and good and safe, and that there is nothing wrong with their bodies if they don’t fit into the tiny little mold that our society tells girls they ought to.
    Did Johanson ever seem grandmotherly to me? Heck no. She seemed like one of the coolest people around, she just happened to be old. [i was 14 when i started listening to her - at that point, 20 was old] She was like some weird alternative version of J.Jonah Jamison, forthright and all about dildoes and assholes and clitorises and condoms. Did she deserve the Order? Who knows? Why not? She told many young people that they should use a condom, be safe, and destroyed a lot of myths about getting preggers and diseases. She probably kept a lot of people safe just by providing information. She helped a lot of people who started crying on the air because someone was finally listening to them, and not judging them.
    Look, any radio host protects their “real self”. It’s a job. It’s in the job description. Especially in that job – providing frank and accurate and good information about sex and safety and sexually transmitted disease – she was always up front when she didn’t know, said things like “i’ll get back to you, i don’t know right now”. There were a lot of people back then who thought that because she didn’t condemn homos or told people to use condoms that she was sinful and guilty of breaking up society – in 1989 there was probably a lot of security concerns at the Q107 building about her show, and yet she kept on. I’d be worried if I were her about my safety, and the safety of the people I care about and work with, so I too would have devised an on-air front. Also, with sex-ed work, you want to be consistent. So an image kept is probably a good thing.
    It’s not like I wanna marry her or anything, but jeez. It’s like you guys want us to go back to rhythm methods and pre-Stonewall.

  • http://null excited

    I am in a brand new relationship after being married for 18 years and separated for 6. The relationship is amazing, very sexual, comfortable, and new. My question is; my new man is fabulous in what he does. I want to ensure that I am also pleasing to him. When being aroused, I find that he does not get a ‘hard’ erection, but he is definiately excited and is able to still have an ejaculation. How is that possible?

  • http://undefined Danny

    It’s no wonder why some people are confused about sexual morality today when a woman who’s suppose to be a doctor (Sue Johanson) is educating and recommending sexual immoralities to people as her own personal “educated” advice. I know that Sue Johanson was a woman who saw many sexual immoralities happening within America and instead of her taking up any employment to fight against it, she instead saw it as a business opportunity for her to make herself her own personal profit from and so then became the sexual immoral “doctor” that she is now.
    Sue Johanson is a woman that is similar to who Jezebel was. Jezebel ignored good healthy sound advice and she instead wanted people to practice sexual immoralities while tricking the same people to believe that her sexual immoral teachings were not immoral but moral instead. Jezebel did this to be acknowledged as an idol so that she could make more and more money because she was greedy for money and publicity.
    In the long run, those same sexual immoralities caused: many psychological perverted disorders that caused: rapes and sexual abuses and STDs (amongst other evils).
    Well, it’s no wonder that it was only a short time that had passed when then some dogs had ripped Jezebel apart. Hmm. Coincidence?
    I hope that Sue herself accepts the truth that Sue’s money-making business should not come at the cost of her causing other people to perform sexual immoralities because those sexual immoralities cause the people who practice them to become (in some way) psychologically perverted.
    People will have to start admitting more that Sue herself is a very psychologically sick woman and therefore it’s she who needs the real doctor before trying to impose herself on society as a real doctor.