Burning Man: Attitudes toward marriage and children

If you’re not part of a camp you don’t learn too much about the personal lives of fellow Burners. Convention dictates that casual conversations stay in the moment and, if the Default World does come up, stay positive. After sharing tents, shade structures, kitchens, dining rooms, and showers with 200 “villagers” and 70 “campers,” however, discussions go deeper.

Our village was primarily populated by Californians, partly due to the extensive infrastructure that needed to be transported to the Playa. “Every guy that I know who was ever married got totally screwed in a divorce,” said a Bay Area woman. Her observation was supported by data from the camp. California-based men in their 50s and 60s who had been married had in fact lost a house, the children, and much of their income going forward: “Getting married was the worst mistake that made in my entire life. I was about 30 percent happier for five years and then lost 90 percent of my happiness for 15 years,” was a typical comment. None had remarried. The never-married men in their 40s and 50s had an almost equally negative view of the institution: “Just about every friend who has been married is now divorced,” one said, “and they’re all paying to support a woman whom they hate and kids whom they never see.”

We had a lot of high-income women in our camp. All recognized that they could be targeted and potentially become the loser under California’s winner-take-all system. A medical professional said “There is no way that I’m going to pay to support a guy. It was bad enough the last time that I lived with a boyfriend and I had to pick up his socks all the time and do his laundry. Thank God I didn’t have to support him financially.” A finance executive said “I worked my ass off for 17 years for what I have. I am not going to risk losing it.” I explained that, based on the income she had described, her exposure under the California child support system would likely be about $2 million ($4 million pre-tax) for one child. She responded “That’s an unacceptable risk.” She wanted to have children, but recognized that the only way to do it without substantial financial risk was to find a mate with a higher income, thus making the pool of potential men very small. [She was nearing the end of her fertility and had been pursuing an economically irrational life strategy. As a young woman she had dated some men who went on to become successful professionals. If she had gotten pregnant with these boyfriends she would today have all of the children that she wanted, just now entering college, plus an extra $5-10 million in post-tax assets via child support profits.]

Despite a high level of education and a long residence in California, there were a lot of misconceptions about California family law (similar to what we found surveying Massachusetts residents). Many villagers wrongly believed that they could limit their exposure to child support lawsuits via a prenuptial agreement. They also did not understand that an out-of-wedlock child from a one-night encounter would yield the same child support profits as the child of a marriage. Nor did they understand that child support revenue was potentially unlimited. They were not aware that family law varied widely from state to state and that the California system was very different from nearby Arizona’s, for example.

Lending support to the plot of Idiocracy (“The smartest, the most fit among us no longer procreate while the stupid screw their brains out ensuring that the human race as a whole gets stupider and stupider and stupider. Without any natural predators to thin the herd; with science, welfare, and television keeping the dumbest alive, healthy, and happy enough to remain potent we’re done for.”), the successful Californians (biotech, software, medicine, etc.) in our village recognized that having a child opened the door to a lawsuit from a financially-motivated plaintiff. Here was one of the more colorful comments:

“Considering the extensive, repeated, and generally copious amount of unprotected sex I’ve had over the years, my $5,000 vasectomy has provided an infinite (or better) IRR. I better re-test that it’s still working. I guess with the 20-somethings the risk is orders of magnitude higher than with the older Cougars. I would pay big bucks for a DIY home fertility test… it’s a massive headache to schedule and get it done wherever the fuck they test for negative fertility.”

[Note that Burners in their 20s had a more positive view of marriage and, in fact, there were a handful of weddings actually performed during Burning Man.]

A high-income woman asked “Why does [a high-income middle-aged fellow villager] chase after women in their 20s?” The response was “Well, he tried being a good husband and father and all that he got for his trouble was a set of divorce papers and a $10 million hole in his pocket.” The woman nodded thoughtfully and said “fair point.” For his part, a middle-aged man observed “Women in their 40s don’t want to get sex out of men for their own pleasure anymore. When they reach 40 they look for other stuff that they can take from a guy. Most of the ones I have met are divorced and heavy drinkers. They’re really mean when they’re drunk.” A female psychologist said “Research shows that humans need only one close social connection. So as long as she can get alimony or child support, it doesn’t make sense for a woman to stay married once she has had a child; the child becomes her main social connection.” Why divorce at that point? What’s the problem with having the father of the child around as an additional social connection? “My patients don’t like to say this directly, but they enjoy going out, meeting new men, and having sex with them. It’s a lot more exciting than cooking dinner and sharing a bed with the same man every night.”

Relations between children of divorce and their fathers were consistent with the research we reported on in the “Children, Mothers, and Fathers” chapter (“When fathers and children live in separate households during part or all of the year, these routine exchanges [helping with everyday events] are not as frequent or as easy. Thus, the loss of a household brings a decline in father-child contacts and a loss of paternal time investments. … As time goes on, a child’s contact with his or her father becomes increasingly infrequent. Ten years after a marriage breaks up, nearly two-thirds of the children report not having seen their fathers for a year.”). A divorced-for-20-years father from the Bay Area said “I regret all of the time and energy that I spent on my children after the divorce. With the every-other-weekend schedule we just grew further apart every year. They were strangers within five years and the visits stopped because it wasn’t satisfying for anyone. It would have been smarter to start a new life on the day that I was served and not dwell on what turned out to be the past.” How did the kids turn out? “Pretty bad, but it might have been genetic,” he responded. “Remember that their mom married a guy for his money and then divorced him because she found someone a little richer and figured out that she could collect money from two guys at the same time.” Another father said “Divorce spoiled my experience of fatherhood. When I saw my son it would remind me of how much money I was paying to his mom and the lawyers, the guys that his mom was cheating on me with during the marriage, and how stupid I was to have gotten married. There was no joy left in the relationship for me and I’m sure that he sensed it. We’d been inseparable when we all lived together, but he stopped visiting when he was a teenager and I seldom see or talk to him today.” The psychologist in our village said “It is rare for me to see a child of divorce who wasn’t profoundly damaged. When they’re young and the judge cuts their time with their father what they perceive is that their father has abandoned them. Nobody recovers from that. For the rest of their life they will be insecure. When they’re teenagers they come to realize that their mom did it for the money and/or so that she could have sex with a bunch of new guys. It is tough to come to terms with the fact that your mom was a whore.” What about as adults? “Men whose parents were divorced are wary of marriage but eventually they seem to succumb and, of course, eventually get taken to the cleaners just like their dad did. Women also tend to do whatever their mom did. If mom worked, the daughter will work. If mom worked her body and the child support system, the daughter will work her body and the child support system.”

Californians are great customers for the therapy industry and the human potential movement. One father said “I spent a lot of time driving to Berkeley for ‘forgiveness therapy.’ But I discovered that it only works when you’ve suffered a one-time injury. It doesn’t work if every month you have to write a new check to a person who betrayed you and then sued you. Whenever the therapist would ask me to think about my ex-wife I would just fantasize about having her killed so that I could get the kids back and stop paying her. It doesn’t help that my girlfriend refers to the ex-wife as ‘the greedy cunt.'” The psychologist weighed in: “Therapy works best for trivial problems. If you’re depressed when your circumstances aren’t depressing or if you get anxious or angry about things that don’t bother most people. It doesn’t work if something truly bad happens to you, such as losing the house and the kids in a divorce.”

Not everyone was down on the Californian family law system. “I got married when I was 22,” said one woman, “looking primarily for financial security. About five years later my next-door neighbor got divorced and I learned from her that I could keep the financial security and enjoy my freedom at the same time. For the last 20 years I have been able to do whatever I want, whenever I want, including come to 10 burns. To me child support meant not having to work at a job unless I loved it and it was no more than 20 hours per week. To me it seems crazy that anyone works 40 hours per week.”

[Note that Burners are a biased sample. The Californian who is living behind a white picket fence with a spouse and 2.5 children is less likely to be able to escape for a week than the childless or divorced Californian.]

Related:

Full post, including comments

Music of the Migrants?

We had some friends over for dinner recently and the discussion had included how some Norwegians felt about immigrants from Syria and Afghanistan (e.g., “My son’s school in Oslo is already 80 percent Muslim; when he was younger he would be sad because he wanted to play with some of these kids and they responded that their parents had forbidden them to play with Norwegians and/or Christians.”). I tried to find some background music to fit the topic but there doesn’t seem to an Internet radio station dedicated to whatever music these folks might be listening to as they settle into their new European homes.

Readers: Who are the great musicians of Syria, Afghanistan, and this migration? Where can their music be heard?

Full post, including comments

Health Care in Black Rock City

One of the tidbits that I learned at Burning Man was that medical care is provided during the event by roughly 300 volunteer doctors and nurses (link). The on-Playa facilities include an X-ray machine and are backstopped by helicopter airlifts to Reno (there seemed to be a handful each day). About 2,800 Burners, out of a population of roughly 70,000, seek treatment each year. The primary maladies are dehydration and soft tissue injuries, the latter hardly a surprise given the amount of rebar that is sticking out of the Playa and not always clearly marked. As far as I know, only one of our 70 campers was treated in 2015. He applied his 25-year-old windsurfing skills to the challenge of windsurfing on wheels. It turns out that rolling resistance on the Playa is lower than water, thus resulting in higher speeds, and it also turns out that falling on the Playa results in a significant road rash.

One challenge is figuring out where Burning Man would fit into the Worldbank’s table of health care spending as a percentage of GDP. Since the medical professionals are volunteers, is it below Singapore’s 4.6 percent of GDP? Or since the rest of Burning Man is a gift economy and sometimes the clinic folks call in a $5,000/hour helicopter would it be above the U.S.’s 17.1 percent?

Full post, including comments

What if someone who cared about student outcomes got a job as a professor?

“I have one of the best jobs in academia. Here’s why I’m walking away.” answers the question What if someone who cared about student outcomes got a job as a professor?

Here are some choice excerpts:

Liberal arts programs, and the humanities in particular, have become a place to warehouse students seeking generic bachelor’s degrees not out of any particular interest in the field, but in order to receive raises at work or improve their position in a crowded job market.

Once upon a time, in a postwar America starved for middle managers who could file TPS reports, relying on the BA as an assurance of quality, proof of the ability to follow orders and complete tasks, made perfect sense. But in today’s world of service workers and coders and freelancers struggling to brand themselves, wasting four years sitting in classes like mine makes no economic sense for the country or for the students — particularly when they’re borrowing money to do so.

online education isn’t a solution — it’s a Band-Aid on an infected wound. In place of thought-provoking video chats and genuinely creative software applications the theory promises, most online students get Blackboard — a cumbersome and inefficient program that only a bureaucracy could love.

The most questionable statement within this epic rant is “there’s no time to worry about the fallen when your own pay lags well behind the national average.” What does this means for a humanities professor? The national average for a poet? http://philip.greenspun.com/book-reviews/higher-education is a review of a 2010 book whose authors concluded that a liberal arts professor earns about $242 for each hour of required work ($265/hour adjusted for the inflation that politicians assure us does not exist).

Full post, including comments

The September/October issue of Technology Review

Technology Review is MIT’s alumni rag. I’m secretary for the Class of 1982 and part of my job is getting alums to write in regarding their recent activities. To spur discussion I asked them to comment on the September/October issue of the magazine. But now I think that it would be fun to open things up to readers here. The message to my classmates:

Who wants to eat food that has been doused in RNAi? And, more importantly, can spray-on RNA for crops improve spray-on tans for pale MIT grads?

How about the MIT battery nerds who left American taxpayers and investors with a $500 million hole in their pockets via A123? (who could have known that Chinese lithium-ion battery manufacturers were also capable of innovating?) Is their new company, 24M (page 21), going to prove the old adage that “this time it is different”?

How about Amazon’s new robot-stuffed warehouse? As U.S. labor costs rise (health insurance increases, more complex regulation, litigation costs to defend against various employment-related lawsuits, $15/hour minimum wage), do robots give big companies a further edge over small companies? How will your workplace change in response to higher labor costs? What about your household? (see $15 minimum wage and Obamacare impact on home siding for some ideas)

What about the page 88 article on solar that says rooftop solar isn’t competitive even if solar cells were free? (due to the cost of other stuff) Does that mean we must limit our solar use to Burning Man? (see http://tinyurl.com/2015BurningManPG for my slideshow from the event or youtube if you want to learn everything important about Burning Man in 2 minutes, 45 seconds) Does this change the way you think about rooftop solar or do we still love it for the showing-off-to-the-neighbors value?

Tech Review has told us a lot about driverless cars. How would they actually change the economics of your enterprise? How would they change your personal life?

What do you all think about the articles in this issue of Tech Review?

Full post, including comments

Stupid Ahmed Mohamed question

Readers:

Here is a dumb question about Ahmed Mohamed, the student who has been in the news lately for “making a clock” and bringing it to a public high school.

MIT has admitted this child to the PhD program in Physics (let’s hope he doesn’t figure out the difference in pay between working as a Physics post-doc and as a medical doctor (see “Women in Science” for what happens when people do figure this out)). Barack Obama has invited him to the White House. Google invited him to come hang out. Twitter offered him a internship.

The one thing that no journalist has tried to explain, however, is what Mohamed actually did. Did he go to the beach, melt sand into silicon wafers, create discrete transistors and solder them together to “make a clock”? That would be challenging even for a grown-up. Did he get a clock kit, sort of like the old Heathkits that every American child was previously assumed competent to build (but now everyone is too busy on Xbox?)? Did he design a clock from scratch, and then build it from TTL chips or burn a PAL, then wire-wrap everything together? Did he find plans for a clock online and buy the parts from DigiKey to assemble it? What does “make a clock” mean in this case?

Can readers help? What did Ahmed Mohamed actually do, expressed in terms of schematics, components, soldering, wire-wrapping, etc.? (And I guess a separate question is why does nobody care enough that journalists would write about this? Is it truly impossible to explain 1960s technology to an American layperson?)

Full post, including comments

What does the Catholic Church have against divorce lawsuit defendants?

I’m not a Catholic so I don’t think too much about the Pope. However, I do read New Yorker magazine and a recent article made me wonder why the Catholic Church doesn’t treat divorce lawsuit plaintiffs and defendants differently. As noted in the History of Divorce chapter, an American divorce in the old days typically meant that both spouses had negotiated and cooperated, possibly traveling together to a divorce-friendly jurisdiction such as Nevada. Today, however, the one thing that a defendant in a no-fault jurisdiction (nearly all U.S. states) knows is that he or she will lose the divorce lawsuit, regardless of how much is spent on defense (i.e., the divorce will go through, even if no wrongdoing by the defendant is alleged or proven).

Consider a woman who testified at a recent Massachusetts family law hearing (previous posting). As noted in the previous posting:

the one woman who testified about losing her children; she was a yuppie identified by the court as the family “breadwinner” while her husband, a firefighter whose full-time job consisted of just two 24-hour shifts per week, was anointed the “primary parent” (the “breadwinner” was ordered to keep supporting this guy, and presumably any young hotties he hooks up with, until the kids turn 23))

Suppose that the father had educated himself about family law in advance, married her purely for the cash, and then sued her as soon as she had generated his desired number of children. She was an unwitting participant in a purely mercenary arrangement. She did nothing to cause the divorce, other than failing to educate herself regarding Massachusetts law and, before agreeing to a marriage or child-bearing, move to a jurisdiction that provides fewer financial incentives for mercenary marriages and/or child-production. Once sued there was nothing that she could have done to prevent becoming divorced. Why does the Catholic Church now want to block her from entering into what might be an enduring marriage? (Let’s hope that she is smarter next time and settles in a different state and/or marries someone who earns more than she does and/or quits her job and thus doesn’t present her partner with a continuous financial incentive to file a lawsuit.)

Full post, including comments

Burning Man Demographics

Following every Burning Man, the organization conducts a census. Here are some highlights from the 2014 numbers:

  • the male/female ratio is 58/41 (plus 0.9% “fluid”)
  • 69 percent of Burners identify as “heterosexual”
  • 47 percent of Burners are from California and roughly 13 percent come from outside of the US/Canada
  • Democrats outnumber Republicans in a 43:6 ratio with “76% of unaffiliated BRC citizens [saying] they last voted Democratic”.
  • median income is about $55,000 per year
  • median age is 34

DSC03040

The media has been excited lately about the racial composition of attendees at Burning Man. Larry Harvey, the founder of Burning Man, was asked a question about the overall whiteness of Burners at a press conference during the event. He responded “We are not a Utopian society. I will believe in Utopia when I meet my first perfect person. Unlike our liberal critics, half of my family is black. We’re not going to set racial quotas or judge people by wealth. I’m unwilling to impose change from outside. We have to generate change from the inside.”

[My own explanation? A plurality of Burners come from Silicon Valley or the East Bay, plus some techies who live in San Francisco proper. Mother Jones says that the Silicon Valley workforce is approximately 1.8 percent black. It should not be a surprise that Burning Man reflects the mixture of people you’d find in Silicon Valley. If Silicon Valley employers ever decide to offer wages high enough to recruit and retain qualified black employees then presumably Burning Man will become less white/Asian.]

Related:

Full post, including comments

Boston Marathon bomber’s lawyer profiled

New Yorker magazine has an extensive profile of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev‘s lead defense attorney, Judy Clarke. She is apparently one of the nation’s leading criminal defense lawyers, whose fees were paid by your tax dollars (the woman who writes those checks, from her desk at the Justice Department in Washington, was actually at Burning Man this year!).

Amidst the puffery about how great this woman’s career has been (and Sheryl Sandberg would no doubt want us to point out that, had Judy Clarke been a man, she could have truly been successful) are a lot of interesting details regarding the defense strategy. Sadly for this graduate of the Cambridge Public Schools tolerance and diversity programs, it seems that nothing works well when you are a young jihadi and every member of the jury is wearing a “Boston Strong” T-shirt.

Full post, including comments