Except that isn't rape and only stupid men think women believe it is. However, what definite _is_ rape is sex without consent due to alcoholic incapacitation of the victim. This gives you victims who would have great difficulty proving a damn thing in court. Victims who get their attack consistently mischaracterised by men who prefer to believe a man's version of events over a woman's.
Now, if you're asking me how many women have been raped in a fashion that is likely to result in a conviction, I'll agree that the number is much smaller. But let's not confuse a failure in society with a society where this stuff doesn't happen.
You talk about a "scientist", only all these reports are stuck together by actual scientists, and all you've managed to produce is some flimsy MRA talking points.
TL;DR; Try believing women for once. It's surprisingly informative.
It's curious that you define rape as something that happens to a woman, whereas "sex without consent due to alcoholic incapacitation of the victim" can happen to a male, too. I've had male friends raped in that way, and the only one who tried to report it to the police was disgusted by the officer's response: "Score!" He outright refused to take a complaint from my friend.
Rape is also defined (by the Rape Crisis Centre in New Zealand) as sex where one party has pressured the (unwilling) other into it, pressured the other into sexual acts, used alcohol or drugs to generate compliance, or even simply used force. Each and every one of those can be applied to a sexual encounter between a male and a female, with a non-consenting male. Would you just believe the women in those cases, too?
Something that's quite interesting to note, I've seen a citation of "The Gender of Sexuality" by Rutter and Schwartz for a claim that lesbian women reported rape by their partners in 1 out of 3 relationships, double the rate claimed for heterosexual relationships. (I haven't read the book, and the citation was quite some years ago.)
You make some good points and you're right, men can be victims and women can be perpetrators. And yes, women can be liars. But liars to the extent that it invalidates the CDC's preferred methods? I'd need to see some hard proof of that.
Now, if you're asking me how many women have been raped in a fashion that is likely to result in a conviction, I'll agree that the number is much smaller. But let's not confuse a failure in society with a society where this stuff doesn't happen.
You talk about a "scientist", only all these reports are stuck together by actual scientists, and all you've managed to produce is some flimsy MRA talking points.
TL;DR; Try believing women for once. It's surprisingly informative.