That's what I'm getting at.
Um...Didn't you notice the large amount of peer-reviewed citations right in the middle?
Yeah, the "propaganda" is in fact the big pile of citations by mainstream researchers.
And the even bigger one is the CDC 2010 and 2011 report. Basically in both years they found that the 12 month prevalence of rape for females and "being made to penetrate" for males was not just close but
identical (within 0.1% of each other). And the "being made to penetrate" question for men is
worded almost identically to the rape question for females, so it's a clear apples and apples comparison. The reason for "being made to penetrate" is that the CDC definition of rape requires you to be penetrated. e.g. if a woman ties a guy up or gets him really drunk and he wakes up with her bouncing on his dick, that's not "legally" rape, even though everyone would say she raped the guy, and it's still a crime with comparable charges. "being made to penetrate" added to the CDC sexual violence survey in 2010 covers those incidents, and the prevalence was WAY higher than anyone expected, 1.1% of the adult male population, the same as females who say they were raped.
So it's common, and if you read some victim stories, the difference in how people percieve this breach of consent is completely different. One guy was *really* drunk at a party, e.g. couldn't stand up, talk etc, and some woman forced herself on him, people saw this and basically laughed, someone threw a condom in, and said "have fun ... " and left. Imagine if that was a girl instead, we'd be really horrified by this story, where people abetted a rapist, but those people probably thought they'd done nothing wrong. That guy says he has psych issues now. I'd say this is arguably a situation in which men are in fact worse off than women, purely because that guy was crying out for someone to help him but unable to articulate or fight back and everyone (male and female) just thought that was the funniest thing ever.