How is it not equally bad when a girl kicks a boy in the balls hard for other reasons than self defense, as when a boy violently puts a girl in that kind of agony and gropes her?

And yes, that IS comparable, because when a girl does this for other reasons than self defense, it's not "because it just happens to hurt the most", as if this was just some gender neutral thing; it's out of a lack of regard for males and intended to hurt, humiliate, violate and/or punish him as a male by specifically exploiting his male weak spot and genitals, for some twisted sense of joy or satisfaction as a girl.
That one hundred percent fits the criteria of sexual violence. Sexual violence doesn't require sexual lust or arousal to be involved.

Even if you do not agree, HOW are girls who do this any better than boys who put girls in that kind of agony and grope them? How is that any funnier, more forgivable, less shameful, less mean-spirited, less hurtful to the victim?