Yes and no. There is nice simplicity in the robbery analogy but I am one of the people RFFU refers to as being uncomfortable comparing rape to other crimes, especially robbery. The reason being that it perpetuates the idea that sex is a valuable commodity that men bargain for/steal from women. Women can't "give away" sex in the same way a philanthropist gives away money because that's not how sex works. It's not something to be "given" and "taken," it's a mutually enjoyable activity between two people.
A better analogy, though still not perfect, is sharing food with someone. That's a pleasurable shared activity. Both people participating are mutually enjoying an activity that benefits them both. Say that person A holds up some cake and B shows no particular interest. B doesn't say no, but doesn't smile, doesn't say "mmm," doesn't give any indication they want the cake. It would be acceptable for A to say "Would you like some cake?" and possibly use some very mild persuasion to convince B to have some. But if B continues to show no interest absolutely no one would think it was right for A to then sulk, get stroppy, intimidate or outright force B into eating the cake. The same thing should apply to sex. It is totally and utterly optional in all circumstance to have sex or not. Some friendly mild persuasion is fine and normal, but coercion of any kind is not ok. Ever.
To extend the analogy, no sane person would ever shove cake into the mouth of a very drunk/asleep person. And yet some people thinks it's ok to shove a penis into a very drunk/asleep woman. Why is that I wonder?