Yes Rebel. And entitlement and not necessarily consciously seeing women as inferior - but the chosen victim type, and that doesn't extend in most cases to all women.
It's why we have so many Mothers, sisters and wives/partners who are so, so sure that their son/brother/partner couldn't possibly have done what they were accused of. People couldn't understand why Ched Evans partner for example stood by him and went on to have a baby with him.
Sometimes it is that the supportive partner has been abused, ground down or manipulated. That's rare. More usually they support their son/brother/partner because they've had loving relationships with them that they trust and they just can't possibly imagine that their loved one would do that. Because they respect, support, love and protect the women in their lives that they care about and see as important.
They divide women into categories.
Peter Sutcliffe isn't necessarily a good example here as he never raped his victims but the OP was questioning extreme and rare situations which rape murders or serial murders are. He adored his Mother, was devoted to his wife and dominated by her with no suggestion of any abusive or disrespectful behaviour from him at all.
His Dad, brothers and friends took the piss out of him not having affairs, taking his shoes of in the house because his wife demanded it and doing housework (not usually done by men in 1970s Northern households with expected gender roles).
His wife Sonia couldn't believe what he was accused of and as she still visits him, maybe never will. His sisters loved him and appreciated the fact that he would insist on walking them home to offer protection as the 'Ripper was about'. He knew he was the Ripper but made his sisters feel loved and protected.
He didn't hate women. He hated a 'type' of woman which he categorised himself.
'Dirty' prostitutes that had previously humiliated him and later on, any woman that was walking about late at night that he could think was probably also 'dirty' in some way.