The “most gullible man in Cambridge”?
A number of people have asked my opinion of this article that appeared recently in New York Magazine, entitled “The Most Gullible Man in Cambridge A Harvard Law professor who teaches a class on judgment wouldn’t seem like an obvious mark, would he?”
It’s about Bruce Hay, a Harvard Law professor who was scammed by two women in a way that’s a bit complex to describe, but it involves a paternity claim and ultimately the commandeering of his Cambridge home. It’s long, so you may not want to slog through it. Suffice to say that yes, Hay seems quite gullible, although I doubt he’s “the most gullible man in Cambridge.”
In online commentary at one site or other featuring the article, I’ve seen a lot of people mocking Hay. But I’m not joining in the mockery. One reason is that it’s easy, really really easy, to look at a con from the outside and feel superior to the mark (in this case, Hay). I would never be taken in by something so ridiculous and transparent, you say. And probably you wouldn’t. I don’t think I would.
But perhaps we both are wrong. Because con artists are clever, and they play on whatever is the weakness of the particular person with whom they are dealing at the moment. And we all have our weaknesses, although they’re not necessarily the same weaknesses as those of Bruce Hay.
What were the weaknesses that might have made him susceptible? Being middle-aged and divorced (although he lived with his ex-wife in what appears to have been an amicable arrangement for friendship and child-rearing.). Being susceptible to the come-on of an attractive young woman, and having sex with her. Being so liberal and PC that this woman and a transgender friend of hers could bully him into almost anything. Perhaps also being lonely in the emotional sense, and even (maybe) being somewhere on the spectrum and having some difficult in reading people.
And last but not least, consenting to have his private life aired in New York Magazine, with the effect of making him the object of ridicule.
“I would never be taken in by something so ridiculous and transparent, you say.” [Neo]
Throughout our life we are all repeatedly conned. it may not be the local ne’er-do-well with a game of three-card Monte on the street corner, but every time we are upsold, or brought into a store by a loss-leader, or told to prefer this to that because it’s “better” or “cheaper” we are being manipulated and to some extent, conned. In fact the very best cons leave us never realizing that we’ve been conned at all.
My first question was why would he consent to have his story written and most certainly expose himself to ridicule?
One possibility is he’s applying the “doesn’t matter, had sex” meme.
Another is that while us deplorables will mock him, this episode will give him some victim status among the only people whose opinion matters to him, his ultra-elite liberal peers. Plus, it also puts down in print how bona fide “woke” he is with regard to the deference/submission he displayed to the trans person involved.
How about all the gullible people who have been conned by the democrats and the mainstream media, as in:
Trump is hitler
Trump praised neonazi demonstrators and called them fine people
Trump is a russian spy/tool/puppet
Trump is a dictator
Trump had tanks in Washington DC to take over the country
Trump was referring to the people in Baltimore rather than the rats and insects
It is astonishing how many gullible people are living in the US
santisc:
I think that his reason was to warn possible future victims.
He was not their only mark.
These women detailed in the article, were sure good at spotting weak, eager-to-please, males, with various emotional issues of their own. What did they lure in? Four?
I’ve been puzzled at the number of somewhat similar instances of males in academia being run-over roughshod by unattractive women who’ve initiated sex with these dweebish clowns at the snap of a finger, and then leveraged the encounter to accuse them of rape or other outrages. These are often guys with supposed “anxiety disorders” it turns out (what the hell is that supposed to be in a man?), or some other mental malfunction.
It makes me laugh – if grimly – at how easily these gawky characters are enticed and then rolled, by females who, right out of the blue basically, offer to cold f++k them … And then goofy goes after it like he thinks that what the popular guys do. It gives new meaning to the terms “sordid” and “pathetic”. And geez … it’s not even last call for alcohol at closing time.
Yeah, yeah, we’ve all encountered the buxom real estate agent who flashed us in the back room; the stewardess who was so touchy-feely friendly it was mystifying; or the sexy looking wife of the guy who owns the company running the booth across from yours at the trade show come over and inform you that she will be in the bar after the booth closes, because “Papa’s” no fun and likes to go to sleep early; or maybe just the drunk girl at the party who grabs your crotch … But being older than 18 is being old enough to know somewhat better. Because by then you know how to evaluate opportunities, and you know what a sap looks like, and you don’t want to see a sap looking back at you in the mirror the next morning as you splash water on your face.
What a bunch of pathetic saps.
Its easy to judge a mark after the fact, from the outside of the con.
But my years in law enforcement have taught me that everyone, every single one of us, have a psychological fulcrum or fulcrums. And con artists are extremely adept at detecting and gaining leverage on them.
People think they would never fall for those tricks. Maybe they wouldn’t. But don’t worry, the con artists have more. We can all fall prey to greed, envy, lust. Maybe they judgmental types think ‘You can’t cheat an honest man.” But that line, aside from being a W.C. Fields invention, is a kind of con itself. Honest people are conned all the time..Maybe the fulcrum is compassion, love or honor.
Confidence tricks are described as ‘confidence’ because the trickster gains the marks confidence. But I have modified that theory in my head to use the other definition of confidence as well: They can easily take advantage of the mark’s confidence in their intelligence, their judgment and their decency-the mark’s vanity.
The mark’s vanity, whether they are greedy or compassionate, always gets some play. We can all fall for these tricks and don’t lie to yourself about that. The mark in this case seems like someone I would naturally loathe due to their political inclinations. But he, and especially his wife/ex-wife and children, have my sympathy.
As Al Pacino said, playing Satan, in The Devil’s Advocate:
“Vanity. Definitely my favorite sin.”
The little head on a needy man who is not in a strong stable relationship does not have a brain. Friendship, companionship and a wild and crazy adventure trigger off stuff that causes common sense to go out the window and it is possible that 20% of all grown men have made a few bad decision in moments of weakness which make the most vulnerable fresh roadkill for vultures who prey on them.
I read the entire article last week when Ann Althouse blogged about it. My impression of the story was that Hay was attempting build sympathy for himself in his Title IX fight (the women had filed a complaint against him at Harvard which he is still fighting). He just miscalculated the impression of himself that is conveyed by the story. I had zero sympathy for him- he seemed a complete doofus, and found it most interesting that his ex got him to sign over his stake in the Cambridge house.
1. Professor Hay had two children with his ex-wife after they were divorced. That’s how I recall the story. And she’s an assistant US Attorney.
2. People believe what they want to believe.
3. Hay is an idiot any way you slice it.
4. He’s shelled out $300k in legal fees.
5. The children in this matter have been abused.
I remember about ten years ago, there was a professor of Psychiatry at UC, Irvine who was in court as his children tried to have a guardian appointed. He has sent a million dollars to some scan in Taiwan.
Of course, he was a psychiatrist.
A personal friend of mine, a woman orthopedic surgeon, has sent hundreds of thousands to some man in central American who I don’t think she has ever met.
First, this falls into that category of “Did no one ever tell you that wanton sex with strangers was a bad idea?”
And second, as FractalRabbit says…”We can all fall for these tricks and don’t lie to yourself about that.”
100% true. Never say “Never.”
Con artists keep trying out their cons until they find someone who responds. And eventually they find someone who at that moment is vulnerable. I once got a letter stating that I had won a million bucks but needed to send $2000 for “transaction” costs. I actually spent half an hour wondering if it was worth the risk. Normally I would have tossed the letter without a moment’s hesitation. But that day, for whatever reason, it was tempting.
Two things:
(1) The trans-person, Mischa Haider, is not just a random grifter, who saw a liberal mark ripe for the plucking. Haider is a serious person pursuing a doctorate in physics at Harvard and that ain’t nothing. Haider is also a serious commentator on trans issues for the Guardian, Slate and HuffPo.
I assume some of Hay’s intent is to take Haider down with him. Likewise, though to a lesser extent, his young lover, Maria-Pia Shuman.
By Hay’s confession Haider and Shuman are ruined for further scams against anyone who can google, and perhaps professionally as well. I give Hay credit for that.
(2) Hay clerked for Justice Scalia. After Scalia died, Hay went public to viciously criticize Scalia based on Hay’s relationship with Haider:
“I am close to one of the victims of his operation, a transgender woman named Mischa Haider, whom I got to know during the course of her work on a Ph.D. in physics at Harvard. … Her intellect would have made our brilliant Justice want to hide his head in a bag, to borrow his charming words from last year’s marriage equality ruling. Those who have any doubt about trans mothers should meet Mischa’s children.”
After praising the person he didn’t realize was scamming him, he continued:
“She could not live with herself, she tells me, if she did not devote her talents to helping the many trans women whose lives are decimated by the bigotry and ignorance of those around them. Bigotry and ignorance inflamed by demagogues like Antonin Scalia, whose toxic rhetoric has done so much to incite and legitimate fear of gender nonconformity and elevate it to the level of constitutional principle.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/there-are-only-losers-in-the-wild-story-of-harvard-law-professor-bruce-hay
For that, IMO, Hay deserves everything he gets.
Sometimes a PhD just means “piled higher and deeper,” but if it is from Harvard it doesn’t stink.
Getting into the Harvard physics doctoral program is extraordinarily competitive, even if one plays the trans card. And it’s quite hard to find work as a physicist even if Harvard punches your ticket. I once worked with a physics major from CalTech. He said it was just too hard to find work, so he switched to software.
I believe Haider’s career as a physicist or physicist professor is quite screwed at this point. Good on Hay for that.
We think that we are teaching our children not to lie. Or, perhaps, that is what we tell ourselves. The truth is that we are teaching them not to get caught at lying. Lying is, perhaps, the most human art of all. Deception is at the root of nearly all games, and is essential to winning in all forms of human conflict, be it war or politics. But, in learning to lie, we also learn how to know when we are being lied to.
Some of you may be objecting, by now. You are insisting that, “Honesty is the best policy.” or some other such B.S. But it is b.s. Honesty is what we reserve for only our most intimate friends and family, if that. In public, we present an image that may be a part of the truth, but not all of it.
The secret to not being taken advantage of by conmen is to never covet that which is not yours. In this, the Bible contains wisdom. The man or women who does not want that which he has not earned cannot be conned.
The most important lesson we can learn about lying is to never deceive ourselves.
Just curious, what actual physics work has Haider ever generated? There was a litany of excuses produced for the absence of dissertation work, but from anything cited it sounds to me like Harvard was just as much of a mark as Hay and the other three men were. And Haider has made it clear to Harvard what happens when Haider is thwarted. As to the story, it was poorly written and miles too long, but noteworthiy for this point: Harvard, the “best and brightest”, apparently gave tenure and an obscene salary to a simpleton and set him to teaching his law students the fine art of making decisions. When his own decisions made him (and the school) a byword Harvard repented, but too late for the reputations of all involved.
“…the fine art of making decisions.”
Indeed, to paraphrase Susan Sontag (on a slightly different topic), one oughtn’t be too surprised to discover that frequenters of “Reader’s Digest” are “better informed about [certain] realities…” than readers of (in her example) “The Nation”.
To be fair to Harvard, that august institution of higher learning probably been far too busy surveilling—and firing—law faculty professors who “go overboard” in their zeal to respect and uphold the law and the Constitution in ways that are at the moment not acceptable (in all the “right” circles).
In any event, one really should try hard to avoid such bizarro entanglements…
https://www.sciencealert.com/if-you-thought-quantum-mechanics-was-weird-wait-til-you-check-out-entangled-time
…(as one commenter mentioned above, even if you don’t much care for your own reputation and well-being, at least think of the kids, think of posterity)…
…but once embroiled, one can only hope to emerge safely, all things being relative, when the dust settles (if it ever does)….
To be sure, one can always publish a juicy “kiss-and-tell” of no doubt great charm, wit and angst (not forgetting—most importantly—the insane and gory detail) to try to recoup, if not any dignity, at least some moola—isn’t Capitalism great!!
And yet, one should never gloat, since such an ordeal could, as mentioned above, happen to anyone.
Alas…it is entertaining (as long as one isn’t mixed up in it). For those of us “well-gosh-it-could-never-happen-to-me” types who are intrigued by these sorts of sordid episodes, here’s another rather amazing and barely believable “how-could-they-get-involved-with-those-creeps-what-they-ever-thinking?” opus:
http://archive.is/w2JXo
Read the article and the comments hoping to have the only interesting question answered. Is she really Mort Schuman’s daughter?
Still wondering… But feeling extraordinarily sane.
I read the article when Ace linked it. My take-away was wondering what part Hay’s medication for his depression, contributed to his awful decisions from the beginning. There’s a lot of baggage there (sexually abused as a teen) that probably made him more vulnerable to these people than the average person. If his trouble with alcohol coincided with his prescription depression medication, well, I would be shocked if good, solid decisions ensued. The people I know personally that take medication for depression are still troubled people. I’m told that it helps many, but, sadly, Hays would fit in with the ones that I personally know (admittedly not a large pool).
This situation really takes the gloss off the ‘Harvard Law Professor’ brand – Elizabeth Warren could not be reached for comment…
A friend of mine was conned out of her house by a man who pretended to love her. They had been a couple for at least a year before he took off with the money. I met him when I attended the surprise party he threw for her 40th birthday; I remember wondering why he didn’t realize she wouldn’t appreciate a surprise party. He didn’t study her quite well enough to figure that out, but he sure managed to get her to think she was important to him. She had a nice little house in a very nice town. The plan was that they were going to buy a new house together and then move in together and eventually get married. They found the house, and then he managed to get her to trust him to take care of all the details. They sold her house first, and then he took the check for the full amount to the bank, he said, to make the down payment on the new house, but instead he skipped town with all her money. Nobody could believe it. Her parents spent a fair amount of their own money tracking him down and trying to sue him or get him to face criminal charges but somehow he escaped all that. He must have gone to a different country. Eventually she learned that he had done it before! She ended up speaking on the phone to the other woman he had cheated out of her money, and apparently it was the same basic story. Oddly enough, it made her feel better to have that conversation. Because as bad as it is to lose a whole lot of money, being fooled in this way is much worse emotionally. You wonder how you could possibly have missed the signs, feel ashamed at having been so desperately needy, etc. That someone else had fallen for the same con made her feel a bit less stupid and crazy. She was finally able to see the situation for what it was and blame the perpetrator for his crime.
As Jordon Peterson has noted, every life has it’s tragedy and there is evil in the world, and there are some people out there who actively want and do to hurt others (Peterson said it much better). Hay found his own two evil bastards.
I knew a guy whose mother was a Pentecostal Christian. She had sold a house and had a nice nest egg. She met a fast-talking smoothie at a church meeting who said his God-given mission was to help widows. Indeed, he helped himself to a substantial portion of her money.
Unfortunately for him two of her other sons were criminals. They broke his legs and got back most of the money. I try not to like that ending.
huxley said, “Unfortunately for him two of her other sons were criminals. They broke his legs and got back most of the money. I try not to like that ending.“
There ain’t nothing wrong with that ending. Years back it would have bothered me. A bit. Now I just smile.
I am trans-mother. Hear me roar!
Tragically, transgender women with children often eschew the term “mother,” resigning themselves to society’s reduction of motherhood to reproductive organs. Or else they accept some hyphenated version of the term, placing themselves secondary to the person who carried and birthed their children, regardless of the living truth of their families. For many, though perhaps not all, I suspect that abjuring the language of motherhood is done reluctantly, as a result of social coercion. How dare they call themselves mothers when they possess neither ovaries nor birth canal?
I am a mother, and those with presuppositions to the contrary must lose them. I am the real, entire, and, in my case, only mother of my children. My motherhood is without hyphens, qualifications, or apologies, the injudicious prejudices of a blinkered society be damned. Such prejudices wound not only families with transgender mothers or other LGBTQ mothers. Even cisgender, heterosexual mothers who adopt, for example, face similar styles of questioning and are not considered their children’s “real” mothers. Alas, our supposedly advanced civilization continues to foreground the most ancient rites of flesh and blood.
–Mischa Haider
https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2016/9/13/i-am-trans-mother-deal-it
I had won a million bucks but needed to send $2000 for “transaction” costs. I actually spent half an hour wondering if it was worth the risk.
I listed some furniture on Craig’s List, well known for scams. I guy offered the asking price and sent me a cashier’s check for more than the price. He wrote that rest was for “Transportation” and asked me to pay the “transporters” out of the excess. I went to a branch of that bank in Tucson and they told me it was a forgery.
A friend of mine was conned out of her house by a man who pretended to love her.
This happened to a woman I know, the ex-wife of a friend. She married this guy and after about two years he announced he had refinanced her house and was leaving. She had a hard time getting that fixed.
Jane Alexander, a wealthy widow who was scammed, lost her home, and set up an organization to help families solve the murder of their loved ones. Her aunt was brutally killed by her con-artist boyfriend, for what would be her inheritance . I’ll never forget watching the documentary on this story. One of the most compelling parts was, rather than become a burden to her adult children (and it was their lost future inheritance from her that she most regretted) she got a job, lived in a one-bedroom loft and set up that agency and worked successfully with the police to pursue justice. About the book:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Jane_(book)
It reminds me of the movie “The Best Offer” starring Geoffrey Rush, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Best_Offer However, the con was much better in the movie.
I would bet $1000 Haider is the father of all of Shuman’s children. The fact that the courts have not ordered DNA tests after all this time is ridiculous. Hay is an idiot, not “gullible” to have gotten involved in all of this.
Hmph. Look at how many people voted for our last two illustrious con-men, Messrs. Clinton and Obama.
Meanwhile, speaking of con-guys & -gals, I hope everybody has seen House of Games with Joe Montegna and Lindsay Crouse. Most interesting movie, and one on my not-too-short list of favorites.