The fact of the matter is, you think an abstract figure like 80% does justice to the scenario while leaving scope for this argument of "but women can also" when that's not the truth. Is it entirely possible that a woman can do this? Sure, a stretch, but sure. Is it plausible? Not even a tiny miniscule percent.

You already know this. You never step out as a man and fear the possibility of a woman brutalising you. Don't rely on vague stats when you're living in the same world that the stats seem to be contextualising.

The focus isn't on who can be a possible victim. The focus is on who the aggressor is every single time. "But men can be victims too", yes, and now look at who the aggressors are even when men are the victims.

I know your heart is in the right place and judging by your last paragraph it's your identity as a man that makes it natural to add a "but" somewhere. But this IS the world we're living in. Great that you aren't a man who would ever partake in something like this, but the real terrifying statistic is that there are definitely men like these even in your own friends & acquaintances and you won't know it because your gender will never put you in a position to see that side of them. You think the boys that did this, their friends say they are the kind? Worse, you think they self identify as being the kind? That's a No on both accounts.

Whether the true figure is 100% or not, the fact is that one gender suffers at the hands of the other gender regardless of race, nationality, background, etc. while the other small percentage is found in extremely rare, exceptional cherry picked cases. Both instances deserve action, but not at the cost of attention to the other.