To Turn a Blind Eye

When is it right to turn a blind eye to things? To the child begging on the streets that could be part of a consortium of beggars? To countries that defy international law and commit genocide? To the maiming and killing of cats and dogs?

Recently, I discovered that someone I had been close to before but no longer, was engaging in unprotected sex with other men. Which is his prerogative. Literally, as we say it here in Singapore, it's his own PASAL (malay: business). And while, previous ties means I could not divorce myself from opinion, I should have been able to ignore it and let him live his life the way he chooses.

Life sometimes does not allow that as nothing happens in a vacuum. And whatever we do, will affect others. And in his case, living his life that way would mean endangering a person close to him.

This person has a 21 year relationship with a woman.

The stereotypes are there of course. The advent of the internet allowed him to explore his sexuality. He would go online to share to strangers that he had lost sexual desire for his partner and was only interested in men. That he is conflicted about balancing his sexual needs and his need to protect the love he shared with his partner. He is older. Financially stable. Repressed by society in his youth. Married/common law wife. The profile fits.

Again, how a person chooses to live his life should be his own prerogative no? Perhaps in this case no.

All things remaining equal, the fact remains that his activities out of the household has potentially put his partner at risk of exposure to HIV or STDs. So, in a situation such as this, does a person turn a blind eye? Should anyone with such information let his partner know if they could? Or butt out?

The camps are divided.

There are those who say that she needs to know and ignorance is suicide. Oprah Winfrey has done several shows on men on the down low and the female guests all testified that the first thing they did when they found out their husbands were cheating on them with other men, was to get tested. All of them with no exception said they would have preferred to know than not know.

Then there are those who say that revealing such details is not an external responsibility. That person who engaged in unprotected sex would need to reveal it to his partner if he truly cherished their relationship. It is a matter between a couple and only between a couple.

So where does the responsibility and accountability lie? Surely the man who started it all. But does it also fall on anyone else who come into possession of the information? Does it become their responsibility to let affected parties know?

HIV is still a problem worldwide, and responsible action is always the lesson taught in every HIV center. Does anyone expect a man who cheats on his partner to be responsible enough to come clean about his activities? It is implausible although at the same time, entirely possible. Statistically? No.

In this man's case, he allowed himself to play raw on the faith of a person's honor, and word. The person he had done it with assured him he was negative. Counsellors in any HIV center will say that the window periods while predictable, are too much of a variable to be toyed with in casual encounters.

The clearest time frame is three months for antibodies to appear from the first point of potential exposure. And if a person is tested negative within those three months, and chooses to engage in unprotected sex again, the window period reopens. If every single casual partner does this, one can never tell who is within and who is out of the window period. Which is why, counsellors encourage monogamy, safe sex and for couples, mutual testing after about six months of safe sex.

No one's word is good. No one should be believed.

It is tragic that this man did. And put his partner's life at risk. He did it, twice and then had sex just last week with his female partner, who has gone through menopause. Suffice to say, as he had revealed in the past, they do not practice safe sex either.

I came into possession of this information. And it had come from the horse's mouth. And I had access to the partner.

Was I supposed to turn a blind eye? Did she not fit the profile as all the other women who had partners on the down low, that they would prefer to know?

So I called.

I could not get her to take the call. And as a friend suggested, I left a message.

What was surprising is that instead of focusing on the potential health risk, she lashed back at me and returned a voice message on my home phone (apparently in a counter move, he had given her my number so that she could defend his honor for him). She was firm in her stand and she was bent on chastising me. That she supported her partner, that he loves her and she loves him, and that she saw the message as harassment. She made some threats, which initially I got offended by seeing that I was trying to help her, but eventually I had to believe that it was a defensive trigger action and she was protecting the only nest she knew for 21 years. They both have a reputation in New York, with him being a former creative chief at Saatchi's and she an established writer. And whenever there are roots, scandal and drama are the shovels that can destroy that and people tend to instinctively go into protection mode first, logic last. Whatever it was, she chose not to entertain even the possibility that there could be truth that her partner had exposed her to health risks.

Her blind faith in him also made her lose sight of the fact that he has cheated on her repeatedly with members of the same sex, that his love for her was not enough to keep him away from his carnal desires, that this was not about the whos and the whens, it was about what he is: that he is more gay than bisexual, that this would not stop and it had nothing to do with her womanhood, and more importantly that he would not stop engaging in unsafe practices.

Love can truly lead people into euphoria, and it can also lead people into losing perspective. I remember the case of the New Jersey governor who was outed by his Israeli boyfriend. Many would say the boyfriend was a jerk. But not many would know the true dynamics of their relationship. Was he a home wrecker? A gold digger? Perhaps. But then again, what sort of man would keep his foreign lover in an apartment a few doors down from where his family lived. What sort of man would pretend to be the perfect husband, father, community leader, then hide away to explore his other desires?

What I remembered clearly though was how during the press conference to announce his resignation over the scandal, his wife stood by him with a firm stance and a loving face. Like a rock, like Hillary with Bill, she stood by her husband, presumably because of love, since a unified stand is better than breaking down in the eyes of the public and their respective families. And this in spite of the betrayal and infidelities. Sometimes ignoring what is logically true can also mean a denial of further hurt and perhaps buy people the chance to return to a semblance of the life once led.

But as we all know, she divorced him. He moved out. And has found a boyfriend.

That story allowed for new beginnings. But what if the governor had exposed his partner to HIV or STDs? Would she still have stood by him and supported him? Probably. But would it allow for new beginnings? Probably not.

Personally, I have learned a painful lesson that the best of intentions can sometimes be met with misplaced hatred. That the provision of crucial information can be seen as interference especially by the guilty. That the messenger can be taken as evil. And this in spite of Oprah's famous mandate, that knowledge is power.

That man who engaged in unsafe sex, told me many times that life for him was shades of grey, and full of complications. I used to counter that and say we should make it our goal to live life as simply as possible. I guess some people chase after complications, and prefer drama.

I still believe that some drama however should be experienced alone for it is not fair to involve anyone else in that. And with that, the biggest lesson learned here is that sometimes it is necessary to turn a blind eye, especially to people who choose to be blind to reality themselves.

JaT

ps. as Asians we are brought up to believe that our elders are wiser because of the life experiences they have accumulated through the years. Sadly, in a case like this, with the man being all of 49 years, this is not true. There is no wisdom, there is no role model to follow. Sad. And yes, I have lost complete respect for this man. And no, there will be no more contact.