Title IX

How 2 Women Used Sex, Activism, and Title IX To Scam a Harvard Professor Out of His House, Job, and Money

Bruce Hay is still serving an indefinite suspension due to the complaints of an insane duo who ensnared him in a paternity scam.

|

Stop what you're doing and read this amazing story in The Cut about Bruce Hay, a Harvard Law School professor who is currently serving an indefinite suspension while the university investigates Title IX claims against him.

Title IX, the gender equality law oft-cited as a pretext to deprive accused students and professors of due process rights during sexual misconduct tribunals, is a minor villain in The Cut piece, which relates how two horrible women perpetrated a long con on Hay that eventually deprived him of his house and livelihood. He has spent $300,000 in legal fees keeping the pair, Maria-Pia Shuman and Mischa Haider, at bay.

Shuman approached Hay in a hardware store in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 2015. She claimed she was visiting from Paris, and staying with Haider, a trans woman working on a doctorate at Harvard. Hay was divorced, but living with his ex-wife and their children. Shuman claimed she was a lesbian—both her and Haider were outspoken feminists and social justice advocates—but found Hay stunningly attractive. They met for coffee, then for dinner, and finally had a sexual encounter.

Months later, Shuman claimed that she was pregnant with Hay's child. He readily believed her, even though he didn't think the sexual encounter had progressed far enough for this to be biologically possible. Hay wanted to be as involved with the baby as possible, but Shuman wanted him to leave his ex-wife, and his refusal to do so infuriated her. Nevertheless, he eventually met Haider, and the trio formed a relationship, of sorts:

Their bond appeared instantaneous. "We had similar political views," he says. "[Haider] told me a lot about the trans world. I had known nothing about it." Soon they were getting together almost daily, talking for hours, sometimes meeting at a coffee shop near Harvard called Darwin's. Haider regularly texted and emailed Hay articles and statistics about trans women being brutalized and murdered by men.

A month after their first coffee, Haider texted Hay to say, "I am so happy we met, you're wonderful and stimulating company, I understand why MP is crazy about you." Behind his back, though, the women mocked Hay. In a text message to Haider that they provided, Shuman refers to him as "Fucking desperado." By then, Hay rarely saw Shuman anymore. Still, they began discussing the possibility of Hay moving in with them. They would be a family, she said: Hay, Shuman, Haider, and their children, including the new baby.

In the weeks leading up to the January due date, Hay used his publishing connections to help Haider pursue her writing. They began collaborating on projects….Haider asked him to share a byline, but he usually served as more of an editor and agent, reaching out to magazine editors to help place their work, including an op-ed for Huffington Post on anti-discrimination bathroom bills and another for The Guardian on the need to block Judge Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Supreme Court. When Shuman was too pregnant to travel, Hay accompanied Haider to Phoenix to consult with a doctor about scheduling gender-affirmation surgery in the spring.

Finally, Hay's ex-wife, Jennifer Zacks, became suspicious about how much time he spent crying on the phone with these two women, and Hay confessed everything. Zacks, who is much less oblivious than Hay, immediately suspected that he was being duped, but he refused to see it.

What followed was a series of outrages. Shuman and Haider tried to bully Hay into "disentangling" himself from Zacks by either selling their house or buying Zacks out of it. They wanted him spending money on their house, and repeatedly pushed him to take out a home equity loan. At the same time, they habitually accused Hay of abusing, even "torturing" them, and constantly threatened to tell the police he had raped them.

At all times, Shuman and Haider wielded their purported victimhood as a weapon. It was their self-defense, and it worked on Hay like a charm. Shuman claimed to have cancer, and when Zacks told Hay she thought this was a lie, he thunderously replied, "How dare you question these people who are suffering?" Later, Haider began reporting Hay to Harvard's Title IX office, claiming, "I have been in an extremely abusive situation with a faculty member and it has been taking a tremendous toll on me. I'm sorry I have not reached out earlier but coming to this decision was difficult and painful. My functioning on many levels has gone to zero, my interest in anything has vanished, I'm transgender and it has taken a horrific toll on my transition."

Shuman and Haider's biggest victory came after they convinced Hay to give them his computer password. They then orchestrated a series of events that made it seem like he had decided to lease the home he shared with Zacks to Shuman and Haider. The women waited until Hay and Zacks were gone: When Hay returned, he discovered that his "beautiful Italianate home on a quiet corner of Mount Vernon Street had been emptied of his family's furniture, cookware, toys, documents, books, Zacks's mother's and grandmother's heirlooms — and everything replaced with the women's furniture. When Shuman had gone MIA in Quebec, Hay believes, she wasn't seeing a doctor. She'd been overseeing the complicated move, all $10,000 of which had been charged to Hay's credit card."

Suffice it to say, Shuman and Haider are con artists. The author of the piece, Kera Bolonik, presents evidence that Shuman has done the pregnancy scam before.

Zacks and Hay recovered the house. Hay has sued the women. The Title IX investigation is still pending, though according to Bolonik, "Hay has already run afoul of investigators for reaching out to journalists (namely me), which they view as an act of retaliation." I have often criticized Title IX for its retaliation component, which calls to mind Catch-22: attempting to prove one's innocence, or to object to the way universities are interpreting Title IX, can be seen as a form of retaliatory behavior that is forbidden under Title IX.

Much like the story I covered yesterday—the case of the transgender activist trying to persuade the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal to force a female-only Brazilian wax business to perform the service on her male genitalia—this is an example of some of the very worst people on the planet weaponizing the rules against unsuspecting victims. It would be a mistake to blame all of feminism, or trans activism, for the cruel and predatory behavior of a few bad people.

But this is far from the first horrific Title IX story I've encountered: in fact, more than a hundred people have sued universities for violating their rights because of Title IX, and won. While Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has made some important reforms, more must be done to tame this beast.

It should be noted that Harvard Law School's faculty have been among the most vocal opponents of Title-IX-run-amok. Their stand seems even braver in hindsight, as Harvard's administration recently declared all-out war on the principles of due process. In any case, Bolonik concludes Hay's story with this:

Hay remains mystified about what the women really wanted from him.
Money appears to be a factor but not necessarily the only one — after all, theirs was a long, expensive, and punitive game with no guarantee of a big payoff. Hay says Shuman once told him they'd targeted him for signing an open letter in late 2014 calling for more due process in Harvard's Title IX proceedings. (Shuman denies ever saying this.) "I don't know if that's the real reason or something she made up later," says Hay. In May 2018, Hay received a barrage of text messages from an unknown number: "Find a way to connect if you want a chance to take the last exit before HELL … Take my word, you ain't seen nothing yet. I promise. Oh and as to your quest for motives? Don't bother. I just really hate the patriarchy, that's it."

NEXT: The Justice Department's 'Big Tech' Antitrust Investigation Is Unnecessary Political Theater

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. 2 incredibly evil grifters and an unbelievably stupid mark.

    1. The man isn’t fit to teach adults to unscrew caps on an elmers glue bottle. It’s a total indictment of Harvard. They should fire him on principle because of how embarrassing it should be they allowed him to even work there in any capacity. He should be fired if his job tasked with sharpening pencils.

      1. The man isn’t fit to teach adults to unscrew caps on an elmers glue bottle.

        What about the bottle cap challenge?

      2. Some very smart people are also incredibly naive. He should probably be fired for embarrassing the university.

        1. yeah to the eleven remaining people who hold Harvard in esteem.

          1. They should probably be fired for embarrassing their employers, too.

          2. It would be a mistake to blame all of feminism, or trans activism,

            Are you sure?

      3. What’s worse is that he apparently taught a law school class on “judgment”.

        1. Yeah, but it’s Harvard.

    2. Umm, get woke, go broke?

    3. Never stick your dick in crazy. Just don’t do it.

    4. White guilt + male guilt + hetero guilt + cis guilt = very stupid

      1. It would be a mistake to blame all of feminism, or trans activism,

        It may be catching.

  2. This man has to be the dumbest man in America and also there is no chance that his “wife/partner” wasn’t cheating on him and sticking him with at least one kid that wasn’t his. He’s an idiot and deserves every bit of this because he is an idiot. There is no sympathetic person in this whole thing except for people who paid for a class that this absolute dunce of a man taught. Which I’m not joking was “campaign of fraud, extortion, and false accusations”. And I cannot believe that’s not mentioned one time in the article.

    1. *Judgment and Decision-Making,

    2. I have little sympathy for the man, but no one deserves this.

      1. I agree Zeb. The two that scammed him need to go to prison.

        1. They deserve prison but there is something really wrong with the guy.

          1. there is something really wrong with the guy

            Just the same way as there’s something really wrong with the hare which fails to run faster than the couple of foxes chasing it.

            1. Just the same way as there’s something really wrong with the hare which fails to run faster than the couple of foxes chasing it.gets eaten during a sexual encounter with two foxes.

              Seriously: having sex with women is legally and socially dangerous in any society, and in particular in “advanced Western societies” like the US and Europe.

              1. The issue was the extreme gullibility displayed by the fellow being “something really wrong”. Well, it is wrong to the extent it shortens his life (natural selection) or curtails his reproduction (sexual selection).

                1. His gullibility would have been largely harmless if it weren’t for the threat of state violence backing up the shenanigans of his sex partners.

                  1. if it weren’t for the threat of state violence backing up the shenanigans of his sex partners

                    The problem is that it is hard to separate shenanigans from legitimate complaints.

                    1. Well, I consider the current application of Title IX and the way paternity, paternity rights, and child support are being handled to be illegitimate uses of state power. Your views may differ, of course.

      2. Did you read the article? he willingly and constantly kept putting himself in this situation at no point would any of this had mattered if he separated himself from these people at any point. He’s a sheep he’s incapable of even existing without someone looking out for him I’m not exaggerating when I say I know smarter people with down syndrome.

        1. Apparently this guy is too “smart” to function as an independent adult. I actually know some people like this and they are all college professors. This is actually quite common in people with Asperger’s syndrome, which maybe this guy has.

  3. Months later, Shuman claimed that she was pregnant with Hay’s child. He readily believed her, even though he didn’t think the sexual encounter had progressed far enough for this to be biologically possible.

    WTF? Either he put it in or he didn’t. There is no “think” to it. It appears that a Harvard Professor has no idea how human reproduction works. Wow.

    1. the man taught “campaign of fraud, extortion, and false accusations” at harvard.

      1. *Judgment and Decision-Making,

        1. Intelligent people make intense study of what they don’t understand, which is why ethicists are the worst people on god’s green earth.

          1. I think all of this fits under the column of ‘some ideas are so dumb only intellectuals believe them’.

          2. That is an interesting point. Professional ethicists are in my experience always monsters. Not just bad people but straight up monsters.

        2. “Those who can’t, teach.”

          1. “Those who Kant, teach.”

            1. “Those who I. Kant, teach.”

    2. Well sometimes “bitches be crazy” enough to circumvent the more straightforward approach.

    3. Are you 8? No, there is more than “putting it in”

      1. You are correct in a pure sense.
        But functionally, there are a lot of sexual acts that generally aren’t going to get a woman pregnant. If she blew him, gave him a hand job, anal, etc. than he probably didn’t get her pregnant.
        Now if the guy is as stupid as it seems, he could have played “just the tip” and actually thought you can’t get pregnant that way.

      2. Pulling out doesn’t prevent pregnancy doofus. If you are lucky or unlucky enough depending on how you look at it, merely putting it in is all that is necessary.

        How do people not know this stuff?

        1. he was suffering anorgasmia. No risk at all.

          1. Not zero risk. Anorgasmia does not preclude the release of some seminal fluid, and there could be swimmers present. It would be exceedingly rare, but not impossible.

    4. You have to click through to cut article to get relevant details. They had vaginal intercourse but he did not ejaculate. Unclear whether or not they used a condom. It is technically possible to impregnate someone with pre-ejaculate, but extremely unlikely.

      1. IT does happen.

        1. Not when you’re anorgasmic. Preejaculate can have sperm, but it’s there from previous ejaculations, and would be cleared out by urination. So unless this guy who can barely get it up had recently gotten off before trying to have sex with this woman, no chance

          1. “this guy who can barely get it up”

            That is not anorgasmia, and anorgasmia does not preclude ejaculation during masturbation.

    5. Wow, indeed. Wish I’d thought of that when I knocked up my first chick. “No, I don’t THINK I actually came when we were doing it.”
      Of course, I was 17 and realized that was complete bullshit.

      Addendum to the “Don’t stick your dick in crazy.” Rule: Also redheads. Admittedly, it’s based on a single data point, but I am firmly convinced.

  4. Shuman and Haider’s biggest victory came after they convinced Hay to give them his computer password. They then orchestrated a series of events that made it seem like he had decided to lease the home he shared with Zacks to Shuman and Haider. The women waited until Hay and Zacks were gone: When Hay returned, he discovered that his “beautiful Italianate home on a quiet corner of Mount Vernon Street had been emptied of his family’s furniture, cookware, toys, documents, books, Zacks’s mother’s and grandmother’s heirlooms — and everything replaced with the women’s furniture.

    That is straight up wire fraud. Where the hell is the Cambridge DA or US Attorney. Both of those women should be under indictment and headed to prison for this.

    1. They should be, but the question is where – the article implies this may have taken place “When Shuman had gone MIA in Quebec”.

      It also depends on whether or not Hay has a few shreds of common sense left and files a complaint with appropriate country’s law enforcement agencies.

    2. Did you see this? His wife is a freaking US assistant attorney in Boston. You’d think at least she’d know who to report them to.

      1. Ah, but SHOULD she? As a Mass. Democrat, she may have layers of privilege, patriarchy and unintermediated power spaces to negotiate. Woke is a helluva drug.

  5. Hay has already run afoul of investigators for reaching out to journalists (namely me), which they view as an act of retaliation.

    In a totally bananas story, this (if true) remains the most bananas. Investigators who cannot remove themselves emotionally from their investigations are ill-suited for the role.

    1. You’re assuming Harvard’s investigators are interested in impartiality.

      1. “Harvard” and “investigator” are two things that should never be in the same sentence.

    2. retaliation against the student, Fist.

      1. For some reason I lost track that one of these pair was technically a student.

  6. >>>readily believed her, even though he didn’t think … this to be biologically possible

    dude.

    1. Lesbians cannot get pregnant.

      1. plus i read somewhere they did it standing up

        1. After drinking Mountain Dew

  7. Shuman claimed she was a lesbian—both her and Haider were outspoken feminists and social justice advocates—but found Hay stunningly attractive. They met for coffee, then for dinner, and finally had a sexual encounter.

    Herpetologists handshake. There’s one category of “hot-chick” I could easily say “no” to, and the above is it. I’m not spending the rest of my life in jail or having my life ruined on a fake rape accusation.

      1. *shrug*

        Regardless, that was the opener to the grift. In my case, if a woman called me “stunningly attractive” I’d immediately cut up all my credit cards and change my phone number.

        1. Really. Now…”Yer purrty hawt, c’mere.” while spilling a rum-and-coke and dropping the joint she was holding. THAT has an acceptable ring of authenticity.

          1. It happened to me once.

            A PTSD disaster.

  8. You forgot to the link to the essay in Slate that Hay wrote on the death of Antonin Scalia where he writes this about one of the grifters (Obviously this was pre-grift)

    Anyway, about his contribution to physics. 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. She’s an extraordinary polymath — gifted violinist, writer and novelist; fluent speaker of a half-dozen languages; math genius. And physicist. 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.

    1. Oh boy

    2. She’s an extraordinary polymath — gifted violinist, writer and novelist; fluent speaker of a half-dozen languages; math genius. And physicist.

      BTW I’ve been digging and while it may be obvious to everyone else, I’m really trying to understand what Haider’s background is, and I suspect, like a real grifter, all of those things aren’t true and there are a lot of publications who’ve printed her stuff that are going to have to do some backpedaling.

      1. there are a lot of publications who’ve printed her stuff that are going to have to do some backpedaling.

        Academisplaining?

      2. Haha. That does seem like a lot of difficult things to be really good at, especially considering the conflicts and mental anguish associated with not accepting ones own biology.

        Where did she(?) find the time?

    3. You forgot to mention that he wrote this about himself not long before that:

      “A more naive young fool never drew breath.”

      1. “Augustus Fink-Nottle was Nature’s final word in cloth-headed guffins,”
        —P.G. Wodehouse

        “Nature abhors a moron.”
        —H.L. Mencken

    4. The jerk got what he deserved.

      And somewhere in the Hereafter, Nino Scalia is laughing.

    5. Damn. I hate, hate, HATE anyone evil enough to abuse someone like they did. But then, there is also the fine philosophical distinction of “Fuck that guy.”.

  9. HE FUCKING TAUGHT “Judgment and Decision-Making” AT HARVARD.

    1. And is there not an excellent lesson to be learned from Prof. Hay?

    2. “Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach”?

      1. ‘“Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach”?”‘…

        “And, those who can’t teach, administrate.”

      2. Those who I. Kant, teach”

    3. And people took his *class*!

    4. And people borrow money they cannot repay to take that course.
      Time for a taxpayer’s strike.

    5. One more data point to prove that Harvard no longer offers education.

      -jcr

    6. Free college for all! So that we all can take this class and thousands of others like it for years and years–all on someone else’s dime.

  10. Blaming Title IX for this is no more sensible than blaming the gun used by a mugger or bank robber.

    1. He did say that Title IX played only a minor role. It’s just the tie in for Robby’s beat.

    2. Perhaps you missed this:

      Zacks and Hay recovered the house. Hay has sued the women. The Title IX investigation is still pending, though according to Bolonik, “Hay has already run afoul of investigators for reaching out to journalists (namely me), which they view as an act of retaliation.”

      Is Title IX not having a pretty big role here?

      1. As big a role as a gun in a mugging. And just as much responsibility.

        1. I don’t think it’s an apt comparison, a law has meaning and interpretation… and the Title IX process is a parallel justice system which allows for due process abuse. A gun is a tool. It’s a dangerous tool, but no one is confused about what its capable of.

          1. I guess to me, that’s a bit like saying “Blaming the Schedule II listing of Marijuana is irrelevant in people being locked up for posession.”

          2. What I meant is that these two women sound like con artists who happened to latch on to Title IX for their particular scam. Like a mugger who chooses a gun or a knife, it doesn’t really matter, they’d have done the crime even if Title IX didn’t exist.

            1. I understand. But I think Reason’s position (not a person!!1!!) has been that Title IX is particularly egregious in that it invites this kind of abuse.

        2. A gun is an inanimate participant in a robbery.

          Title IX is more like an armed platoon conducting an assault. There is agency involved.

  11. BTW, just did a google search on Mischa Haider, and this headline came up from the American Conservative:

    Bonfire Of The Trannities

    Headline. Of. The. Fucking. Year.

    1. Rob Dreher is a bit of a half wit but damn, that is good.

      1. Never heard of Dreher– don’t know much about the rag. But when that came up in the search I nearly fell out of my chair.

        1. He is one of those conservative writers who sits around crying about how horrible things are and how everyone is doomed but Trump doing anything about it is even worse because Orange Man Bad or something.

          1. Part of the crunchy-con Con.

      2. I think he’s just redeemed himself for all of 10 minutesz

      3. Well he used the good half on that headline, I must say.

    2. I like “world historical boob” too.

  12. Every time it seems we’ve hit peak 2019 along comes a story that is just that much 2019ier.

    1. Hindsight is 2020… Not sure where to go with that…

  13. I don’t think even as a horny 13 year old boy would I have bought the line “I am a lesbian but I find you stunningly attractive”.

    The larger concern here is why Hay is allowed to live on his own. This guy needs to be in some kind of supervised living facility for his own good.

    1. I wouldn’t be surprised if he has some form of high functioning autism.

      1. Other articles make clear that’s the case, and that he is heavily medicated.

    2. I’m not exaggerating when I say I know smarter(well more independent and capable) people with down syndrome. Did you read the part where it describes him and his wife’s relationship?

      1. His wife is nearly as evil as the two women who scammed him. What was she doing except sponging off of him and taking advantage of him?

        1. There is not a sympathetic character in the entire article except for the litany of other dudes this chick tried to grift and extort. =I mean I guess the Prof is sympathetic because he’s extremely mentally challenged man. But I kind of find his story uplifting look at what this functionally handicapped man was able to achieve and they say Forest Gump was unbelievable.

          1. But I kind of find his story uplifting look at what this functionally handicapped man was able to achieve and they say Forest Gump was unbelievable.

            Jenny was an absolute bitch to Forest because she shunned him, fucked around, likely contracted AIDS, and left him with a kid.

            There’s no evidence this woman fucked around and she’s still taking care of the kids. It’s entirely possible she found/finds him endearing and, with two kids, apparently correctly decided that she couldn’t have him as an active liability in their lives. See Alicia Nash. I’m not absolutely certain that Zacks isn’t a bitch but, IMO, women like Nash should probably be regarded as goddamned saints.

        2. His wife is nearly as evil as the two women who scammed him. What was she doing except sponging off of him and taking advantage of him?

          She did give birth to two of his kids and whatever the cause of the divorce was, he was still in the house. If she’s a manipulative bitch then the fact that he’s in the house means she isn’t a heartless manipulative bitch and if sponging off lawyer husbands makes one a manipulative bitch then I’m surrounded by them.

          1. “She did give birth to two of his kids ”

            I’m not sure we can definitely say that, the guy who supposedly fathered them was scammed into thinking he impregnated a woman who he didn’t ejaculate inside. I’m not positive he has a firm grasp on how reproduction works. Also judging by his actions in this article I’m pretty sure I could convince him a blowjob could get someone pregnant.

            1. I see no grounds for indictment and can respect women like Alicia Nash or Lindsey Mills who stand by their partners/spouses and families despite adversity.

            2. Didn’t something like that pop up recently? It was roughly; she gave him a bj and saved a mouthful for later to impregnate herself then sued for child support after the kid was born. He lost because DNA said he was the daddy.

              1. Not to take Robby’s side too much, but are we going to indict all women of the non-crime of conception based on the evidence of one kook?

                Unless they eloped within a few days of conception, plenty of other people, likely including this guy’s own mother, had plenty of opportunity to step up and claim the mantle as this guy’s partner/caregiver and no one did. As near as I can tell, from a libertarian standpoint, she’s a far better choice than making him a ward of the state.

        3. I don’t buy that at all. I’ve known a handful of couples who were married and chose to continue living together after a divorce. Most of the time it’s a matter of trying to maintain a stable home for their kids, but also because they both know that living separately will likely bring down the standard of living for both.

          In both circumstances it’s a perfectly rational decision to remain in the same home, especially if you’re older and have no real interest in pursuing another long-term relationship.

    3. “You’d be surprised how many of my fellow Swedish Olympic Sunbathing Team members find an overweight balding schlub in sandal-and-socks, cargo shorts and an “I’m with stupid” T-shirt irresistibly attractive.”

  14. I’m guessing there’s a Harvard professor who… just got red pilled.

    *dun-dun-duuuuuuunnnn*

    1. You’d lose money on that bet.

  15. Life tip:

    Guys, deep down you know whether you’re stunningly attractive or not. If you’re not and someone tells you you are, run the other way.

    1. +10000
      That is probably one of the greatest life lessons I have ever heard!! If a woman loves her man, she will compliment on the things that are true:
      Guy is ugly (you have a great sense of humor!)
      Guy is fat (I love how you hug me and make me feel safe)
      Guy is bald (I love how you have the self-confidence to shave your head and not care what others think)
      Guy has a small penis (I love how you go down on me in bed).
      Guy is stupid (Your naivete is endearing)

      1. Wait, my wife says all those things. What does that mean?

        1. She’s fucking the plumber on Tuesdays.

        2. SHE’S ACTUALLY MARRIED TO BEAR ODINSON?

    2. To be fair, that’s the main tool of con artists of every kind: preying upon what the mark WANTS to believe is true, but common sense dictates is not. That gold bullion that needs to be moved? If it existed, wouldn’t they get someone with experience moving that sort of stuff? That inheritance from overseas? Do you really have any close relatives in Djibouti who are both rich and recently deceased? The beautiful chick who’s suddenly all over average-looking you? Even if you’re a celebrity chef who’s had numerous TV shows, she’s probably a lunatic who will destroy your life and drive you to suicide.

      Con artists know how to identify and manipulate vulnerabilities, and good ones can spot the most vulnerable and easily fooled victims.

    3. It is super important and empowering to be honest with yourself about how attractive you are or are not. But I think the more fucked up a guy is, the less likely they are to know it is true.

  16. At all times, Shuman and Haider wielded their purported victimhood as a weapon.

    NEVER HAPPENED IN THE HISTORY OF EVER!!1!!

  17. This reminds me of a story I read of a household burglar in Florida who got eaten by a gator in the neighborhood swamp when he was hiding from police. A horrific story, but on some level you can’t help but be satisfied that he sort of deserved it.

  18. Suffice it to say, Shuman and Haider are con artists.

    But not normal behavior for outspoken feminists and trans activists…

  19. “Find a way to connect if you want a chance to take the last exit before HELL … Take my word, you ain’t seen nothing yet. I promise. Oh and as to your quest for motives? Don’t bother. I just really hate the patriarchy, that’s it.”

    Prof. Hay is… part of the patriarchy, so they’ve got a point there.

    1. I’m not sure he is actually art of the patriarchy. I think the root “archy” means governance and/or the exercise of power. Hence words like monarchy, oligarchy, or anarchy—a single person, a small group, or no one wielding power over others.

      This professor seems so utterly naive, clueless, and dumb, he isn’t capable of exercising power over anyone. He was the one who was completely subservient to a couple of rather obvious con artists. The guy can’t even manage himself, much less other people.

      1. Cis male— original sin. Debate over.

        1. This. ^

    2. I’d actually take it as proof that this fool needs the drum solo from In A Gadda Da Vida slapped out on his silly face.

      1. With sticks shaped like mushroom heads.

  20. Finally, Hay’s ex-wife, Jennifer Zacks, became suspicious about how much time he spent crying on the phone with these two women, and Hay confessed everything. Zacks, who is much less oblivious than Hay, immediately suspected that he was being duped, but he refused to see it.

    I get the impression that Jennifer Zacks is hot as fuck whether she’s wearing makeup or not.

  21. Umm, so this man had an encounter that stoped short of anything that could lead to pregnancy, yet he still believed he got her pregnant? I sure hope he doesn’t teach biology!

    1. Well, he believes men can be women, so how much does biological fact play in his life?

  22. For additional context of how ridiculous this whole thing was, and how clueless Professor Hay actually is, you can take a look at this 2016 article he wrote for Salon, praising the transgender con-artist Mischa Haider as “brilliant” and blaming Haider’s depression on, of all things – the late Supreme Court justice Anton Scalia!! It is freaking surreal.

    https://www.salon.com/2016/02/27/i_thought_i_could_reason_with_antonin_scalia_a_more_naive_young_fool_never_drew_breath/

    1. “A more naive young fool never drew breath.”
      Huh, at least he got one thing exactly right.

  23. Weird shit like this has happened at Harvard for years. In the early 1990s, there was a psychiatry professor (woman) who got one of her patients (a guy) to dress up as a baby and wear diapers as part of his “treatment”. The guy ended up committing suicide and his family tried to sue Harvard, but of course they were dismissed and the prof was never disciplined. If that happened nowadays, she would probably be using Title IX to sue his family and claim that he raped her.

  24. I just read the whole article, and now I need to take a shower to get the sliminess off.

  25. Semi-O/T – Anybody here ever read “Art of Seduction” by Robert Greene? It’s practically a how-to guide for what these 2 did.

  26. I’m disgusted by the women’s behavior. They need to go to prison.

    I’m ashamed of the man’s behavior. I will never understand these men who let women walk all over them. NO p*ssy is that good.

  27. Ya know… it might not be very Libertarian of me, but let it be a learning experience for him and take the loss. He’s apparently stupid enough to fall for this shit, it wasn’t like these 2 were being subtle about this shit

  28. Just perhaps he may wish to be a little more, how do I say it gently, discriminating in future social liaisons.

    1. “Even though I’ve never met you before and I’m a lesbian I find you strangely attractive” sounds a lot more like some kind of X-rated cosplay than a real-life thing that actually happens.

      1. Actually, she told him he was attractive, and then later said she was divorced from a woman. She never used the L-word.

        1. Well, next you’ll ask why I didn’t read the entire article attentively.

  29. “It would be a mistake to blame all of feminism, or trans activism, for the cruel and predatory behavior of a few bad people.”

    Not as such, but once you’ve started ordering people to abdicate their reasoning abilities and accept absurdities, you’re disarming them of some of their defenses against bad people.

    Just like the trans activists never *meant* for some weirdo to sue to have women wax his balls, but he’d never have been able to get as far as he did without the preparatory crazy stuff which enabled his behavior.

    And if biology is a patriarchal construct and you can’t call someone even a little bit nutty for believing they’re a different sex, then that disarms you of some of your defenses against nutty people claiming to be a different sex.

    Maybe this is simply the price we pay for social justice, though it might have been nice to warn us up front – “naturally a few bad apples here and there are going to misuse the policies I advocate, but surely you won’t let that get in the way of pure justice?”

    1. Maybe this is simply the price we pay for social justice, though it might have been nice to warn us up front not consistently lie every step of the way.

      I’m sure you well know that since before the days of forcing firefighters to participate in gay pride parades and Lawrence v. Texas, religious scholars, conservative thinkers, and regular people have been telling them that this will end with people marrying goats and raping children. Only to have the activists say, “No it won’t, because you’re bigoted and racist and a slippery slope sophist so shut up!”

      1. I think with some people it’s the sentiment which is sometimes mistakenly referred to as “good intentions.”

        Specifically, the idea that an idea so pure and just as theirs can have no downside, and that indeed the very idea of a downside is a right-wing plot hatched by bitter clinging bigots or calculating billionaires trying to distract attention from the plight of the working class.

    2. Well, we all understand the clearly defined classes of victims and villains. Lesbians and trannys must not be doubted. Ever. None would ever abuse the presumption of victim hood for personal gain.

      Haha

  30. People with mental illness are mentally ill in more aspects than just their sex…who could have possibly seen this coming?

  31. Con artists and progressives go together like peanut butter and jelly.

    They believe that one of these days the sketchy guy lurking in the dark parking lot asking for gas money while his sick grandmother waits in the car a few blocks away is actually going to spend that money on gas, not his crack habit. Sure, everyone who has ever done that has been lying. But next time you better believe it’s the truth! Or are you racist?

  32. […] Click here to view original story: How 2 Women Used Sex, Activism, and Title IX To Scam a Harvard Pr… […]

  33. Men get conned by women all the time. But his con required the man to be several miles deep in the progressive rabbit hole.

    1. Like throwing a hot dog down a hallway…

  34. Gee, where’s Arthur Hicklib to tell us clingers about “our betters?” From now on, whenever he posts on reason, we should just reply with a link to this story.

    1. He’s having a tryst with a lesbian who finds him stunningly attractive…

  35. The money quote from the underlying article:

    “Zacks pushed Hay to ask for a paternity test, but Hay wouldn’t have it. Not only did he trust Shuman, he felt it would have been insulting for a heterosexual cisgender man to question a professed lesbian as to whether she’d had sex with other men. He believed her when she said her sexual relationship with him was an exception.”

    What better place to find a woke mark than a Cambridge bookstore.

  36. The liberal fascist pigs in academia would love to get rid of due process just as they have done away with free speech on campus.

    1. Heck, let’s just get rid of male faculty. Except gay men. No more privilege!

      Haha

  37. People like Bruce Hay are your “betters” who want to tell you how to run your life.

    I’d say he should be fired from Harvard, except for the fact that he is quite typical for academia.

  38. “Their bond appeared instantaneous. “We had similar political views,” he says. “‘

    So one of the devils thinks it’s hot in hell. Tough tittie – you deserve every second of it.

  39. Hays once wrote an article for Salon:

    I thought I could reason with Antonin Scalia: A more naive young fool never drew breath

    At the time, he thought his naiveté was best evidenced by the youthful belief that he could convince Scalia regarding his views in the culture wars.

    ” I am close to one of the victims of [Scalia’s] 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. She’s an extraordinary polymath — gifted violinist, writer and novelist; fluent speaker of a half-dozen languages; math genius. And physicist. 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.

    “Since coming out as trans a few years ago, this remarkable woman has suffered a debilitating depression. Partly from the transphobia she encounters daily at the allegedly enlightened Harvard; from the constant stares in public; from the indignity of worrying about things the rest of us take for granted, like walking in the street or using a public bathroom without fear of taunts or violence, or taking her children to the park without fear of being humiliated in front of them. And from the pain of rejection by family and former friends who, despite her prodigious achievements, are somehow ashamed to be associated with her.”

    1. How long do you think it will take Salon to pull down this article?

      1. It depends – I would not be surprised if they’re getting more webtraffic by people going to the article now that Hays has been publicly disgraced after being conned by the person who he praised in the article than when he originally wrote it.

  40. “Two women”? This is dhimmitude to the sharia of the trans-totalitarians who assert the right to dictate other people’s speech and thoughts.

    I’d call him a cross-dressing man but at least call him a male-to-female trans-sexual. Calling him a woman is just a lie.

  41. I’ll skip the movie . But couldn’t Reason find some editing policy like use of italics to avoid such nonsensical lines like ” perform the service on her male genitalia ” ?

  42. As Hay said they have similar political views. One of those views is that one can easily and unconcernedly live off the efforts of other people. So Hay should have expected this. If, that is, Hay really understood the basis of their shared political views. Which he appears not to have.

  43. For a Harvard guy, he sure ain’t too bright.

  44. It would be a mistake to blame all of feminism, or trans activism, for the cruel and predatory behavior of a few bad people.

    no it would be accurate. This is not a matter of kind, but degree.

    The chump perfesser had it coming.. he had his own wife at the time, and was unfaithful to her. The two harpies who targetted him were simply taking their values to their natural conclusion, and doing it deliberately to harm someone else who did not deserve it. But, he seemed to have been a willing participant in their games, of several sorts. But the two harpies deserve prison time for their unlawful scamming. Title nine be hanged…… that is one of the most egregious trashings of the rights of due process ever here in the US. And it is designed to be that way, by precisely the same sorts of perverted wierdoes who scammed this fool of a male, He deserved it, in a big way, but its still a violation of law.

    1. “This is not a matter of kind, but degree.”

      Agreed. Read between the lines to see how his “ex-wife” has largely ruled his life.

      1. Although, he did not “have his own wife” at the time. He had an “ex-wife” who still wanted to dictate the terms of their live in relationship.

  45. Here’s an astounding quote from the article on this guy, after one of the con-artists claimed that Hay had gotten her pregnant:

    “Zacks {Hay’s wife, of sorts} pushed Hay to ask for a paternity test, but Hay wouldn’t have it. Not only did he trust Shuman, he felt it would have been insulting for a heterosexual cisgender man to question a professed lesbian as to whether she’d had sex with other men. He believed her when she said her sexual relationship with him was an exception.”

    Wow. Just, wow.

  46. Here’s a word for what happened to him: “woked.” (Taken advantage of thanks to his see-no-evil indoctrination.)

    1. PS: Examples: “He was woked into putting his life savings into TSLA.”
      “The mayor was woked into abandoning a planned natural gas power plant in favor of 100% renewables.”
      “The retirement-fund administrators were woked into investing in green energy stocks.”

  47. The part about weaponizing the rules to attack the unsuspecting brought to mind The Antichoice–mystical fanatic doctor-killers, blackmailers, infiltrators and transformers of individuals into State Lebensborn breeders. It’s looking like the “weaker” sex is learning by example how to change that unpretty picture. Clearly two can play at the point-counter-point of force and fraud. May the Comstockers lose and never be heard from again!

  48. but, but, but this is IMPOSSIBLE. All women are as pure as the driven snow and MUST ALWAYS BE BELIEVED when it comes to SEXUAL allegations! Please see the WaPo and HuffPO (sarc)

  49. Having had a day to let this story sink in, I am not buying it. I don’t believe that somebody could have been this repeatedly and consistently gullible, and then willingly reach out for a reporter to have tell the world, in excruciating detail, just how ridiculously and consistently gullible he had been. And the story itself is too ridiculous to make sense. I will not be surprised if in a few months, we find out that there’s far more to the story, and that Mr. Hay is not the innocent dupe he claims to be.

    1. You don’t believe that a middle aged man living a largely sexless and mostly emasculated existence would be susceptible to a thirty something grifter employing sex and (more importantly) personal intimacy???

      Because that’s such a rare thing?

      Everyone wants to be wanted. And socially awkward guys (like him) are often incapable of seeing the real reason they are getting such attention.

      1. But to this extent? And to affirmatively reach out to New York Magazine and ask that your story of incredible gullibility be disclosed to the entire world?

        I’m telling you…there is something more to this story that has yet to come out.

        1. There are other victims of this duo, and it’s a matter of public record. Hayes was just the one who was farthest down the rabbit hole.

  50. It is Bruce Hay who has a claim against Harvard and the trans grad student Haider. She made false sex allegations against him first. He never violated ‘her’ rights in any manner. Now Harvard is retaliating against Hay for defending himself.

    1. Harvard is a sad punchline now.

      If I meet someone and they brag about having graduated there I’ll just shrug and say, ‘Meh.’

  51. From The Cut: “Zacks pushed Hay to ask for a paternity test, but Hay wouldn’t have it. Not only did he trust Shuman, he felt it would have been insulting for a heterosexual cisgender man to question a professed lesbian as to whether she’d had sex with other men. He believed her when she said her sexual relationship with him was an exception.”

    Idiot. Fool. A Democrat no doubt.

    As for the rest of the story and how these two nutcases acted. I’m going to stop here lest I say something that could one day be used against me.

  52. How 2 Women Used…

    First factual error right in the headline. It wasn’t two women, it was a woman and a mentally ill man.

    1. I wouldn’t be so sure the man is even a tranny. That may just be part of the grift.

      1. It’s all a grift, even if it’s a grift by a mentally ill man. The guy is a well-known trans activist.

  53. Is it a real story?

  54. Women should simply be avoided until they get their act together. After 60 trillion millennia it would seem a bad idea for anyone to hold their breath waiting, but nothing’s stopping you. It’s a free country.

  55. Sociopaths are not insane. Robbie playing fast and loose with words again.

    Yes, it’s a real story. It’s also a really common story (women who misuse gullible men) and this guy is textbook. Hell, he was already being controlled by his “ex-wife,” just not quite so maliciously. the only newsworthy angle of all this is the woke window dressing.

  56. Thanks admin for giving such valuable information through your article . Your article is much more similar to https://www.solutions.bocsci.com/ word unscramble tool because it also provides a lot of knowledge of vocabulary new words with its meanings.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.