No, what I am trying to say (obviously quite badly) is that most women who recognise that they have been raped, don't count it as them having sex.
Most women whose last encounter was what they know was a rape, see it as being raped. They do not see it as them having sex.
Same is if someone comes up to you and puts their hand between your legs, you see it as a sexual assault, as something that has been done to you. If someone then asked "when did you last engage in foreplay or petting" you wouldn't say the sexual assault, because you wouldn't see it like that.
Same as if you are being stalked, and someone asks when the last time someone woo-ed you was, you wouldn't describe being stalked.
Of course there are occasions when people don't name what has happened to them as they should - and that is understandable. But that's not about those people.
It's about a very basic idea of whether a woman being raped (language - something is being done to her - passive) is the same as a woman having sex (langauge - she is doing something - active - indicates at least some kind of decision or choice on her part).
Most women when thinking rape, do not think of the women as "having sex", they think of them as being raped. Same as when they think of foreplay, they don#t think of sexual assault.
Like I say, maybe the language differs in different places, but around here someone would never describe a rape as a "woman having sex". And a woman who knew she had been raped would think "I have been raped" not "I have had sex".
And in the context of the article it is even more strange - as how can being raped ever be a motvation for sex.