Convicted Rapists Go Free After Acupuncturist's Absurd "Virginity Test"

by Alex DiBranco · 2010-07-02 15:10:00 UTC

In Vietnam, acupuncturist Pham Thi Hong has announced the existence of a virginity spot, a small red spot that she alleges male virgins have on the back of their ears, which disappear after engaging in sexual intercourse with a woman. Her outrageous claims and vehement insistence that three men convicted of gang rape were innocent because they possessed a virginity spot led Vietnamese President Nguyen Minh Triet to reopen the case. The men convicted of gang rape were then released.

In one spark of reason, the three men were at least not released simply because of the presence of a red dot on the back of their ears. Investigators noticed flaws with the original trial and decided to overturn the results after the men had been serving prison time for a decade. If due to these flaws innocent men were wrongly convicted, then of course their release is positive. But plenty of convicts would like another chance to have their case reviewed, and many innocent people are in prison; basing the decision on whether or not to reexamine a trial on the existence of a scientifically unfounded virginity spot is ludicrous and dangerous. Is the next step admitting the testimony of one imaginative acupuncturist in an actual trial, and letting a rapist off as innocent because he has a bug bite (or got a conveniently-placed tattoo)?

Equally disturbing, MSNBC reports that the Vietnamese press has given Hong widespread applause and credit for the release of these men, without casting any doubt on the validity of her little theory. Yet it's not just Western medicine that raises an eyebrow at this virginity spot: other acupuncturists and practitioners of traditional medicine are shaking their heads in disbelief.

Hong says that she was first taught how to test for virginity by feeling a guy's pulse, then came up with the ear-spot method out of her own head. Compounding the fantastical nature of her claims, she states that, somehow, this virginity spot only disappears after a man has had heterosexual sex — masturbation or sex with another man won't do it, although rape of a woman, apparently, would. It's the mystical nature of sticking a penis into a woman's vagina that makes spots fade away.

Now, other men convicted of rape are contacting Hong to ask her to check for red spots behind their ears. Will Hong take up more of their causes and push for retrials on these absurd grounds? She seems to have media backing and the president's ear, but this unfounded idea of a virginity spot should not lead to the Vietnamese criminal justice system being filled with retrials for men who have no better claim than men who don't happen to have (or can't fake) a red spot on the ear. More importantly, in the next case, will her claim that a man has a virginity spot be enough to secure his release, without any other evidence in his favor, potentially setting free a rapist who poses a danger to women?

Photo credit: jemsweb

Alex DiBranco is a Change.org Editor who has worked for the Nation, Political Research Associates, and the Center for American Progress. She is now based in New York City.
PREVIOUS STORY:
The Enough Project Releases Video on Conflict Minerals in the Congo
NEXT STORY:
Fox News' Trotta Still Doesn't Get It: I Want Her Rape Apologism Off the Air

COMMENTS (5)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.