I think it's worth looking at aggregate research statistics on social facts rather just the face-value interpretations of this thread. There's a proportion of truth in what you've said, but in the cultural sea of ignorance, these ideas which insinuate power neutrality have been weaponized against women who are objectively disproportionately marginalized and disenfranchised.
Any exceptions need to take place in very sensitive social "containers" of sociological analysis so as to not blur the lines between cultural relativity and cultural universalism. Micro-macro dialectics must be considered and I'd be concerned about discussions concerning sub-cultural exceptions without (a) the subaltern present and (b) the language needed to contextualize these respective exceptions within real-world boundaries of the social
scale they exist within.
Frameworks are necessary to allocate proportional variance of harm where due to the actual
social location (that is micro- meso- & macro-, structural vs individual autonomy, dominant vs. sub culture, high vs. popular culture, political vs economic, etc. etc.).
Generalized statements of subjective perspective is
going to miss the mark due to the lack of specificity, the role of intuitive face-value bias, etc.
For this reason I encourage people to refrain from judgment and simply trust in the models. Unless you speak spanish, don't try to make an expert opinion on spanish. Just as such, we are not born sociologically competent; it must be learned.
I apologize for my pedantic language; I just don't have the time to define each term and it's impossible to describe without specialized language because post-industrial globalized phenomena are impossible to characterize without language to describe the scale and multiple intersections with other phenomena it exists on. Occam's razor (simplification) cuts both ways.
It necessitates a sociological imagination, a skill most people do not have