When the FBI changed the definition of rape in response to the feminist rape is rape campaign, they erased 90% of female perpetrators and male victims. I decided to give feminists the benefit of the doubt and assume this is what they got not what they wanted. They're removing the doubt.

As you might know, a few years back several feminist organizations launch a rape is rape campaign to try and get the definition of rape changed. Their reasoning was that if you called it something else likesexual assault, it won't be taken as seriously and it won't receive the proper resources. I guess lumping it in with some one grabbing a person's butt might do that.

I'm not sure if the feminists actually lobbied for the current FBI definition of rape or if they were simply OK with the definition that came out. The new definition recognized nearly all female victims except for a very few raped by women and a few male victims. It still erases 90% of male victims and over 90% of female perpetrators. Anyway, I suspected that this was what the feminists were actually fighting for instead of simply taking a victory lap before pressing the FBI to recognize all victims. Well I saw this article on GMP, which I view as a moderate (for feminists) feminist website. Don't let some of the verbage fool you for there is a "tell".

https://goodmenproject.com/gender-sexuality/new-yorks-rape-laws-must-be-updated-to-protect-lgbtq-survivors/

You might read the article and say 99% of it is OK. She's pushing for a gender nuetral definition of rape. Here's the tell that shows she's pushing for New York adopting the FBI definition instead.

"The legislation would remove the penetration requirement and define rape as either vaginal, anal, or oral “contact.”

Because contact with the penis doesn't make a difference.