YANBU OP, but very few people will admit it, because the implications of what you have realised are dangerous to the heterosexual social order.
Females are more at risk than males in hetero sexual encounters - vastly more so in fact, and this is due to biology - the big one is that we are vulnerable to pregnancy, which even if wanted comes with big health risks (including the risk of death), but as the receptive partner we are also at greater risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease, and then the effects of the diseases of often worse for us (e.g., Chlamydia damages the female reproductive system while frequently causing no symptoms in men; and men usually just get warts from HPV, while women can get cancer). Not to mention that males are bigger and stronger and therefore usually easily able to overpower us should they wish to inflict other harms.
The above are all undeniable, physical facts that affect the power dynamic in all hetero relationships and between women and men at the societal level, but as you can see from this thread, women often feel more comfortable calling any woman who notices this crazy, than admitting these obvious truths, because the implications are so unpleasant. Look at your post, in which you gave direct evidence of serious harm to women and girls from sexual relationships with men - and yet people scoffed at you and suggested you are paranoid for observing reality and applying this knowledge in terms of your own life and health.
'penis can literally be like gun which shoots you'
I note that many have chosen to focus on this observation as a particular point of ridicule, which I find telling, because men have been comparing their penises to weapons forever - before guns were invented, the sword was the preferred metaphor, and it's no accident that the word 'vagina' comes from the Latin for 'sheath'. The notion of male genitalia as a sword or gun is not a mere figment of macho fantasy: the penis is a weapon, especially in its ability to force unwanted pregnancy on women. Again, this is undeniably true. That's why mass rape is frequently deployed as a strategy of war. Penises can be instruments of harm in a way that vaginas never can be, and you are not crazy for fearing this - on the contrary, you are clear sighted.
The question is, for women who want to have heterosexual relationships, how can we mitigate this risk, particularly of sexually transmitted diseases, which seems to be your main concern. I'd suggest creating new sexual standards which don't emphasise penetrative sex, for a start. PIV is one of the most risky sexual activities for the woman, with almost no reciprocal risk to the man, yet most straight women just accept that it's something we've got to engage in regularly (I know I used to). Anal sex, which is the most risky for the receptive partner in terms of STDs, is also something that many younger women in particular feel pressured to take part in.
Instead of this blanket, stupid celebration of anything that gets men off under the guise of 'sex positivity', or endless iterations on 'consent' education, I'd really like to see feminists engage with notions of pleasure and harm in female sexuality: specifically, what would a sexual culture that discouraged harm to women look like? To do that we would first of all have to admit that male and female reproductive biology do not confer equal physical vulnerability and therefore men and women are not interchangeable social actors in sexual encounters or LT relationships.