The Red and Black

Originally posted by

!!!

Doyle is odd, but certainly not a predator like Bender.

I agree with this. I had Dr. Doyle for two classes during my time at UGA and though he is rather cavalier in his teaching style, I never felt offended by his comments in class. I was really shocked to find out this article was about him, not that this dismisses his actions in any way.

Originally posted by

Doesn't get it...

From what this article states, it just doesn't seem like he understands there are certain behaviors and actions that aren't appropriate toward students, no matter how innocent they may seem. Calling someone beautiful or noting their fire of golden locks (or however he said it) can be very uncomfortable and, yes, harrasment for someone on the diminunitive end of a professor/student relationship.

Precisely. The *intent* to be a predator is not there, but it's not just what you intend, it's how people take it, and what the community considers appropriate.

Originally posted by

Dan Serafini

What a creep. And does he really think that eating the horrid food at Weaver D's is the same as attending an REM concert? Dude serves mashed potatoes out of a five gallon bucket.

Your ignorance is showing. Do you even know what or who you are talking about?

Originally posted by

AM

Dr. Doyle is an excellent professor. He teaches, among other things, Folklore and Shakespeare, which are two subjects that require one to discuss sexuality. If students cannot handle the material, perhaps they should choose different courses to fufill requirements.

Yes...exactly, and if tastefully done (which it sounds like in the in-class discussion, it was), then such topics should be discussed freely. It's the out-of-class e-mails where it seems he crossed the line, knowingly or not.

Originally posted by

Instructor

It fills me outrage to read how Dr. Doyle hides behind academic freedom while making his sleazy classroom comments, using Shakespeare as an excuse to make off-color jokes. You can see that he gets off on being "un-PC," on being a rebel, and then blaming his uptight students for failing to get the joke. And I don't buy for a minute that he doesn't understand the problem with his actions--he's been told, albeit in a toothless way, that students are uncomfortable with his suggestive talk, and told not once, not twice, but repeatedly. His claims that he's unaware of how he's being perceived are garbage. It's part of the fun for him.

I think you should read the comment right above yours. It is impossible to teach Shakespeare and maintain a sense of context if you don't talk about the sexual subtext that exists in most of his work. Look, the fact is that Shakespeare was much bawdier than Dr. Doyle has been, any day. Frankly, prudery and discomfort with sex make me much more uncomfortable in a professor. I want to be taught by someone who isn't afraid to talk about what's going on in the material. None of the comments I see above strike me as a departure from the subject at hand in the class. I would agree with the poster who said that students who don't like that should withdraw from the course or just choose something else to take - maybe some safe, conventional Victorian poetry. What do they think Shakespeare or the Cavalier poets are about, anyway?

That said, the emails obviously cross the line, and good intentions or ignorance are not acceptable excuses. The problem is that there seem to be two separate issues here: academic freedom and protection of students' rights. Let's not get them mixed up. Do we really want censorship in the classroom? That would mean whitewashing all the life out of literature (and other important disciplines), and I can't think of anything that would be a worse shame.

By the way, I took a course with Dr. Doyle years ago. Yes, he occasionally did talk very frankly about sex. My impression of the course, though, was that every comment he made about sex was germane to our discussion of poetry. I think that part of the story has been blown out of proportion for sensational effect.

Originally posted by

This_just_in_they_wont_sleep_with_you_charlie

Just imagine for a moment that you are at YOUR job. For one thing, no matter how much authority you have, generally speaking there is someone above you who can tell you what to do, regardless of your feelings or intent or opinion. In this case, it was the university who had authority over Charles "Love, Charlie" Doyle. The same complaint has been raised against him FIVE times. I can tell from his smug attitude that he truly doesn't see any need to consider anyone's opinion of his conduct but his own, but that shouldn't be his call to make. Arrogance and self-importance are obnoxious and offensive no matter what job you do, and in this case, he is being arrogant and self-important about a matter that is ACTUALLY illegal. Can you even imagine how many times he talked about "flash dancing" and "pole dancing" with female students and DIDN'T get reported? This kind of harassment between a professor and an undergraduate is not a laughing matter. Dr. Doyle sounds like a monumental douchebag, and someone needs to take his smarmy smugness down a peg. If it had been me writing the article, I wouldn't have even mentioned the sexual content of his lectures. That is entirely different.

But at the very worst, he shows incredibly poor judgment as well as complete inability to follow directions in continuing to write these pathetic, viagra-fueled emails to 20 year old women who wouldn't sleep with him with a 30 foot pole and who are obviously grossed out at even the suggestion of his sexuality enough to file a complaint about it. FYI, Dr. Doyle, you're not the kind of professor most girls dream of being "casual friends" with. What a loser.

If you actually read the article thoroughly you would see that it hasn't been the SAME COMPLAINT five times. You can tell by his "smug attitude?" Oh really? Have you personally sat down with Dr. Doyle and discussed this matter? If so then you would know for sure he isn't a "monumental douchebag" (congratulations on your mature choice of words) but actually a hilarious and completely supportive mentor and teacher. You sound pretty much perfect so I would like to commend you on never having poor judgment.

Originally posted by

This_just_in_they_wont_sleep_with_you_charlie

Just imagine for a moment that you are at YOUR job. For one thing, no matter how much authority you have, generally speaking there is someone above you who can tell you what to do, regardless of your feelings or intent or opinion. In this case, it was the university who had authority over Charles "Love, Charlie" Doyle. The same complaint has been raised against him FIVE times. I can tell from his smug attitude that he truly doesn't see any need to consider anyone's opinion of his conduct but his own, but that shouldn't be his call to make. Arrogance and self-importance are obnoxious and offensive no matter what job you do, and in this case, he is being arrogant and self-important about a matter that is ACTUALLY illegal. Can you even imagine how many times he talked about "flash dancing" and "pole dancing" with female students and DIDN'T get reported? This kind of harassment between a professor and an undergraduate is not a laughing matter. Dr. Doyle sounds like a monumental douchebag, and someone needs to take his smarmy smugness down a peg. If it had been me writing the article, I wouldn't have even mentioned the sexual content of his lectures. That is entirely different.

But at the very worst, he shows incredibly poor judgment as well as complete inability to follow directions in continuing to write these pathetic, viagra-fueled emails to 20 year old women who wouldn't sleep with him with a 30 foot pole and who are obviously grossed out at even the suggestion of his sexuality enough to file a complaint about it. FYI, Dr. Doyle, you're not the kind of professor most girls dream of being "casual friends" with. What a loser.

Look, you're right, I was (am) being immature. But the fact that he has friends and some people like him does NOT make it okay to be so informal and inappropriate with women that don't invite or appreciate it, okay? And no, I haven't ever spoken with him, but his words are used throughout the article, with his permission, it sounds like, and he sounds extremely smug and unable to consider another's viewpoint to me. You can and did judge me by my words, and I don't blame you for it.

Originally posted by

This_just_in_they_wont_sleep_with_you_charlie

Just imagine for a moment that you are at YOUR job. For one thing, no matter how much authority you have, generally speaking there is someone above you who can tell you what to do, regardless of your feelings or intent or opinion. In this case, it was the university who had authority over Charles "Love, Charlie" Doyle. The same complaint has been raised against him FIVE times. I can tell from his smug attitude that he truly doesn't see any need to consider anyone's opinion of his conduct but his own, but that shouldn't be his call to make. Arrogance and self-importance are obnoxious and offensive no matter what job you do, and in this case, he is being arrogant and self-important about a matter that is ACTUALLY illegal. Can you even imagine how many times he talked about "flash dancing" and "pole dancing" with female students and DIDN'T get reported? This kind of harassment between a professor and an undergraduate is not a laughing matter. Dr. Doyle sounds like a monumental douchebag, and someone needs to take his smarmy smugness down a peg. If it had been me writing the article, I wouldn't have even mentioned the sexual content of his lectures. That is entirely different.

But at the very worst, he shows incredibly poor judgment as well as complete inability to follow directions in continuing to write these pathetic, viagra-fueled emails to 20 year old women who wouldn't sleep with him with a 30 foot pole and who are obviously grossed out at even the suggestion of his sexuality enough to file a complaint about it. FYI, Dr. Doyle, you're not the kind of professor most girls dream of being "casual friends" with. What a loser.

I do not disagree that many of Doyle's correspondences are beyond questionable; however, conversations taken out of context can often be misconstrued-- think of comments we might make to our own acquaintances that, if overheard, would appear inappropriate. I'm not trying to say that Dr. Doyle's comments were appropriate in any way, shape, or form, but most of the conversations the red and black pulled were not official complaints.

Originally posted by

This_just_in_they_wont_sleep_with_you_charlie

Just imagine for a moment that you are at YOUR job. For one thing, no matter how much authority you have, generally speaking there is someone above you who can tell you what to do, regardless of your feelings or intent or opinion. In this case, it was the university who had authority over Charles "Love, Charlie" Doyle. The same complaint has been raised against him FIVE times. I can tell from his smug attitude that he truly doesn't see any need to consider anyone's opinion of his conduct but his own, but that shouldn't be his call to make. Arrogance and self-importance are obnoxious and offensive no matter what job you do, and in this case, he is being arrogant and self-important about a matter that is ACTUALLY illegal. Can you even imagine how many times he talked about "flash dancing" and "pole dancing" with female students and DIDN'T get reported? This kind of harassment between a professor and an undergraduate is not a laughing matter. Dr. Doyle sounds like a monumental douchebag, and someone needs to take his smarmy smugness down a peg. If it had been me writing the article, I wouldn't have even mentioned the sexual content of his lectures. That is entirely different.

But at the very worst, he shows incredibly poor judgment as well as complete inability to follow directions in continuing to write these pathetic, viagra-fueled emails to 20 year old women who wouldn't sleep with him with a 30 foot pole and who are obviously grossed out at even the suggestion of his sexuality enough to file a complaint about it. FYI, Dr. Doyle, you're not the kind of professor most girls dream of being "casual friends" with. What a loser.

I take Viagra, and I am deeply offended by this sexually harassing comment.

Originally posted by

Mallory Kirkland

Congratulations to the Red and Black for their article on Dr. Charles Doyle. I'm impressed at the ability to up readership by turning into a senseless tabloid. The Red and Black publishes an amazing article with transparent self-promotion--trying to make it look like quality investigative methods occur to beef up a resume. I hope nobody involved ever attempts a career in investigative reporting. Ever taken a class that teaches ethics in journalism? It's called media framing: calling a person's character into question by only looking at one piece of the picture. I guarantee if the reporter asked multiple students of Dr. Doyle before publishing the article a different, better, opinion of him would surface. Not only is Dr. Doyle an asset to the English department with his wealth of knowledge, he doesn't use immature euphemisms in describing literature. Shakespeare was a pervert. Who would have thought? Dr. Doyle isn't the only person discovering sexual allusions in literature. There are hundred of articles and teachers claiming the exact same ideas as Doyle. Comparing Doyle to Bender is outrageous. Doyle never crossed the lines Bender crossed, and using him as the next poster boy for sexual harassment is anything but just. I admire Dr. Doyle as a respected professor and friend. He goes out of his way to help all students, and class never bores anybody. With any luck tomorrow I'll be able to read another biased article focusing on ludicrous accusations from years ago against another unsuspecting professor.

I could not have said it better. Agreed 100%

Originally posted by

Mallory Kirkland

Congratulations to the Red and Black for their article on Dr. Charles Doyle. I'm impressed at the ability to up readership by turning into a senseless tabloid. The Red and Black publishes an amazing article with transparent self-promotion--trying to make it look like quality investigative methods occur to beef up a resume. I hope nobody involved ever attempts a career in investigative reporting. Ever taken a class that teaches ethics in journalism? It's called media framing: calling a person's character into question by only looking at one piece of the picture. I guarantee if the reporter asked multiple students of Dr. Doyle before publishing the article a different, better, opinion of him would surface. Not only is Dr. Doyle an asset to the English department with his wealth of knowledge, he doesn't use immature euphemisms in describing literature. Shakespeare was a pervert. Who would have thought? Dr. Doyle isn't the only person discovering sexual allusions in literature. There are hundred of articles and teachers claiming the exact same ideas as Doyle. Comparing Doyle to Bender is outrageous. Doyle never crossed the lines Bender crossed, and using him as the next poster boy for sexual harassment is anything but just. I admire Dr. Doyle as a respected professor and friend. He goes out of his way to help all students, and class never bores anybody. With any luck tomorrow I'll be able to read another biased article focusing on ludicrous accusations from years ago against another unsuspecting professor.

Bottom line, this guy sent emails to students that made them feel uncomfortable. You can whine all you want about how being in his class means being exposed to sexuality in literature, and that's fine. But he sent messages to women outside of class several times that they said made them feel uncomfortable. I'm betting nowhere on his syllabus does it say, "get out of my class if you can't take frank sexual discussions and personal emails from me detailing the look of your hair, my mental images of you pole dancing in a g-string..." This guy might be a great professor, but he stepped over the line, was warned about it, and continued to do so again and again. Is he a sexual predator...indications are that he's not. But he has had several complaints filed against him that he obviously thinks don't matter. He states his intentions to continue communicating with students in similar ways.

Originally posted by

Mallory Kirkland

Congratulations to the Red and Black for their article on Dr. Charles Doyle. I'm impressed at the ability to up readership by turning into a senseless tabloid. The Red and Black publishes an amazing article with transparent self-promotion--trying to make it look like quality investigative methods occur to beef up a resume. I hope nobody involved ever attempts a career in investigative reporting. Ever taken a class that teaches ethics in journalism? It's called media framing: calling a person's character into question by only looking at one piece of the picture. I guarantee if the reporter asked multiple students of Dr. Doyle before publishing the article a different, better, opinion of him would surface. Not only is Dr. Doyle an asset to the English department with his wealth of knowledge, he doesn't use immature euphemisms in describing literature. Shakespeare was a pervert. Who would have thought? Dr. Doyle isn't the only person discovering sexual allusions in literature. There are hundred of articles and teachers claiming the exact same ideas as Doyle. Comparing Doyle to Bender is outrageous. Doyle never crossed the lines Bender crossed, and using him as the next poster boy for sexual harassment is anything but just. I admire Dr. Doyle as a respected professor and friend. He goes out of his way to help all students, and class never bores anybody. With any luck tomorrow I'll be able to read another biased article focusing on ludicrous accusations from years ago against another unsuspecting professor.

I could not agree with you more. Not only are they bringing up accusations from 2005 and before, but also fishing for students to claim he is still doing it. Leave the innocent man alone and find something current to write about!

Originally posted by

Mallory Kirkland

Congratulations to the Red and Black for their article on Dr. Charles Doyle. I'm impressed at the ability to up readership by turning into a senseless tabloid. The Red and Black publishes an amazing article with transparent self-promotion--trying to make it look like quality investigative methods occur to beef up a resume. I hope nobody involved ever attempts a career in investigative reporting. Ever taken a class that teaches ethics in journalism? It's called media framing: calling a person's character into question by only looking at one piece of the picture. I guarantee if the reporter asked multiple students of Dr. Doyle before publishing the article a different, better, opinion of him would surface. Not only is Dr. Doyle an asset to the English department with his wealth of knowledge, he doesn't use immature euphemisms in describing literature. Shakespeare was a pervert. Who would have thought? Dr. Doyle isn't the only person discovering sexual allusions in literature. There are hundred of articles and teachers claiming the exact same ideas as Doyle. Comparing Doyle to Bender is outrageous. Doyle never crossed the lines Bender crossed, and using him as the next poster boy for sexual harassment is anything but just. I admire Dr. Doyle as a respected professor and friend. He goes out of his way to help all students, and class never bores anybody. With any luck tomorrow I'll be able to read another biased article focusing on ludicrous accusations from years ago against another unsuspecting professor.

I think it is very unfair to try to say The Red & Black is turning into a tabloid. These are students who are extremely motivated, taking time out of their schedules to research and write these articles. I feel confident in saying this because I am not a member of the staff and that's because I simply don't have the time to dedicate to it. Attacking the writers researching methods is a moot point. She did the research needed, the right way. It doesn't matter what the students that he's never spoken to in an inappropriate way think. These are obviously the people who haven't had to deal with his harassment. The article never once says that Doyle harasses all of his students. I think it's wonderful that The Red & Black is bringing things like this to our attention. Maybe you would feel differently if someone in a power position spoke to you in a way that made you feel uncomfortable. Hopefully that never happens to you. And hopefully because of these stories there can be something done to make sure it happens to less and less students.

Originally posted by

Mallory Kirkland

Congratulations to the Red and Black for their article on Dr. Charles Doyle. I'm impressed at the ability to up readership by turning into a senseless tabloid. The Red and Black publishes an amazing article with transparent self-promotion--trying to make it look like quality investigative methods occur to beef up a resume. I hope nobody involved ever attempts a career in investigative reporting. Ever taken a class that teaches ethics in journalism? It's called media framing: calling a person's character into question by only looking at one piece of the picture. I guarantee if the reporter asked multiple students of Dr. Doyle before publishing the article a different, better, opinion of him would surface. Not only is Dr. Doyle an asset to the English department with his wealth of knowledge, he doesn't use immature euphemisms in describing literature. Shakespeare was a pervert. Who would have thought? Dr. Doyle isn't the only person discovering sexual allusions in literature. There are hundred of articles and teachers claiming the exact same ideas as Doyle. Comparing Doyle to Bender is outrageous. Doyle never crossed the lines Bender crossed, and using him as the next poster boy for sexual harassment is anything but just. I admire Dr. Doyle as a respected professor and friend. He goes out of his way to help all students, and class never bores anybody. With any luck tomorrow I'll be able to read another biased article focusing on ludicrous accusations from years ago against another unsuspecting professor.

Journalism Student,
No one is saying the writers are unmotivated, nor are they denying the fact that they take time out of their schedules to write stories. Accusations that the writers are lazy were never made. I disagree with your comment that she did the research in "the right way." There is a lot more to the story than was presented in that article and the facts presented are framed in a way that leads readers to make particular judgments about the character of Dr. Doyle. While striving to make comparison between Doyle and Bender, the writer does not acknowledge the important differences in the two cases. I find it hard to believe that this story was written with objectivity, and that is important to me as a consumer of news. In situations like these, where matters of judgment and perception are at play, context is vital to informed and objective opinion making. A quality journalistic investigation should explore ALL aspects of the story. As readers, we should demand it.

This is probably a more typical case of sexual harassment than the Bender case, and hence a better example of the kind of thing the University needs to be handling more effectively. Key idea: Multiple warnings didn't seem to have any effect.

Originally posted by

Former Student

I've taken a course with Dr. Doyle; he crossed the line multiple times. Many of his sexual comments were not germane to the class discussion, though I believe he utilizes the shock value to maintain undergraduate attentiveness. I have two examples:

In his Spencer course, Dr. Doyle suggested that men during the Elizabethan era suffered less from erectile dysfunction because women did not cover up their "natural odors" the way they do now. He went on to suggest that part of what women do "wrong" now is to shave their pubic areas.

During another class session he told a joke about a man who was (pardon the reference) "fingering" his wife. She began to complain about the discomfort that his rings were causing her. The husband responded: "That's my watch."

After hearing that joke one of my colleagues walked out of class, making the announcement that his behavior was totally inappropriate. He seemed unmoved then as he does now.

I've taken multiple classes of his including this one. The first comment you mentioned was appropriate in context. And as for your second comment, you totally butchered the joke, which is hilarious if it is told correctly and -again- in context.

Originally posted by

Former Student

I've taken a course with Dr. Doyle; he crossed the line multiple times. Many of his sexual comments were not germane to the class discussion, though I believe he utilizes the shock value to maintain undergraduate attentiveness. I have two examples:

In his Spencer course, Dr. Doyle suggested that men during the Elizabethan era suffered less from erectile dysfunction because women did not cover up their "natural odors" the way they do now. He went on to suggest that part of what women do "wrong" now is to shave their pubic areas.

During another class session he told a joke about a man who was (pardon the reference) "fingering" his wife. She began to complain about the discomfort that his rings were causing her. The husband responded: "That's my watch."

After hearing that joke one of my colleagues walked out of class, making the announcement that his behavior was totally inappropriate. He seemed unmoved then as he does now.

For the person who thinks that you had be there to get the joke, there is no context that could excuse such crude comments. I'm cringing while I'm reading these letters. I hope that the department wakes up and acknowledges that that English majors are being subjected to this crap, and that they are told that the "dirty literature" justifies making comments like the examples given above.

Originally posted by

me

Ok, I have to say that my first inclination was to defend Doyle. I'm an English major, I've met the man on several occasions, though I've never had a class with him, and he really does not strike me as a sexual predator. I believe that if he wasn't a wonderful teacher who made a positive impact on the majority of his students, then there wouldn't be so many of them to step up to defend him so vehemently. I also think that it's dangerous to get into a witch-hunt mentality, where we are constantly looking for traces of sexuality in contexts that would otherwise seem innocent.

That said, I think we need to be careful here to avoid dismissing the claims of these women. Obviously, people felt uncomfortable, even violated in a learning environment that should ALWAYS feel safe. I do believe (actually I know) that there have been similarly inappropriate comments made to other women, who just didn't feel that the situation justified the trouble of a formal complaint. While sexuality should not be avoided in a scholarly environment where the subject matter makes it necessary, there is never a context which makes it appropriate for a professor (or any person in power) to make a comment about a student's personal sexuality.

The bottom line is that we are neither judge nor jury here. Perhaps it was inappropriate for the R&B to print this while Doyle still has classes in session. I can only imagine the awkwardness that must prevail in his current classes. But maybe not, and if this was necessary to start putting a stop to the sexual harrassment problem at UGA, then the ends probably justify the means.

How diplomatic albeit Machiavellian of you. If we are neither judge nor jury who is? His students? Most of them (myself included) adore him. He doesn't make comments about individual's sexuality; he comments on sexuality to students. Is there a gray area? Yes. But Doyle is no Bender. He is an asset to the University, and I for one am a better student of literature because of him.

Did you read the article? The contents of some of those e-mails were certainly addressing PERSONAL sexuality. I'm not commenting on the contents of his classes; I've never taken one. But the e-mails to his students that are included in this article without a doubt create at very least, a hostile learning environment (not my wording, that's the accurate term). I know that there are gray areas in all this, and that is exactly what my post is trying to communicate. But there is no gray area in those e-mails. They were inappropriate, regardless of his intentions, and should be dealt with by administration. The question is not whether he is a good instructor. He obviously is. But he has overstepped some serious boundaries and created an environment for at least some of his students that is hurtful to the entire educational process.

Originally posted by

Jeremiah

There are a bunch of moron english majors in here trying to educate us about how "shakespeare was sexual! omg! no wai!"

listen, turd-for-brains, he sent an email to a girl commenting on her pole dancing and describing himself daydreaming about her in a g-string. please tell me how shakespeare is involved here. Shakespeare has nothing to do with it, morons. He's a creeeeeeeeeeeeeeep. Get over it.

I really heart this comment. "Please tell me how Shakespeare is involved here." Wonderful.

Originally posted by

Used to Be in the Department

There seem to be a lot of former English students who think that, simply because they weren't sexually harassed themselves, no sexual harassment was possible. These same former students seem to think that, because certain professors were charismatic, caring, and effective teachers, they were incapable of harassment. That is a particular form of both narcissism and logical fallacy...

Thank you! No sexual harasser has the time to personally harass everyone they come across, and maybe not all English majors are his type. I hear he has a preference for long blonde hair.

Yes, there are two separate issues here, the obviously harassing emails and then the discussion that went on in class. However, I feel for the women who had to deal with the harassing emails and then sit through one of those classes. I'm sure the combination was especially horrible.

The women who felt uncomfortable in Doyle's classes should have had the opportunity to learn from a professor who could discuss sex in class in a more appropriate way. Doyle's comments were often too "ha ha, look what this might have meant, such my dick, he he." From one who's fortunate enough to have learned from professors who understand how to appropriately discuss sexually charged art, literature, or cultural topics, there are ways to discuss sex that are more appropriate and mature. Having the boldness to repeatedly bring up sex acts in class doesn't automatically make oneself an enlightened liberal scholar worthy to carry the banner of academic freedom. My high school classmates often made crude sex jokes in class, but that's because sex was the sole focus of their minds... Maybe if he'd gotten these ideas published in a peer reviewed journal, I'd be more impressed, but correct me if I'm wrong--I don't think he has. (I know he's published, but on sexy Shakespeare? Please let me know if I'm wrong. His vita isn't available online.)

Doyle's classes also included enough anti-Jew, anti-Catholic comments for another R&B article. And on top of this, the English Department made him a mentor for undergraduate students. So much was wrong here that I'm glad this story is coming out, even if a few years late.