Well okay, some radfems might, but meh, People-B-Crazee, you know?
What I found fascinating though (and I'll write more about this when I have the time) is something Figleaf whipped out in reply to my post, and it summarises a theoretical aspect that I hadn't noticed before with regard to social conceptions of rape, irregardless of gender, namely the way that rape is defined into non-existence, and how that, if we're going to deal with rape at all, we need to attack society's conceptions that A) rape is somehow okay when it occurs within certain situations and B) Rape does not really occur when it occurs within certain situations, two idea that are interconnected and interlinked to the point where they're interchangable to a certain degree.
The money quote from Figleaf:
I'm sorry to report from personal experience, the unattentive mind easily conflates the accurate "the majority of victims are women" with the inaccurate "only women are victims." Consequently it wasn't recognized in my neighborhood that the bully who forced boys and young men to put their mouths on his genitals was raping them instead of just bullying them in a particularly humiliating fashion. I say I'm sorry to report this because *I* didn't recognize it either until decades later.
I've got much to more to say, but I'll leave you with this for now.