I think you're onto something with the irreparable harm thing. I don't think she suffered some irreparable harm, but the fact that she COULD have is important. But I think it leads us in a direction that modern society doesn't want to go. If a man pulled a stunt where he had sex with 100 women, we wouldn't worry about him suffering irreparable harm. So our concern for irreparable harm for a woman is something very much like a recognition of women as "the weaker sex." I don't say that in a disparaging way. I think the biggest area where you hit the nail on the head was when you said that these men should have seen themselves as her protectors and not been willing to take advantage of her. But if someone really wants to say that what the men did was worse that what this woman did, the only available lane is male headship. Even the "irreparable damage" thing is just a plausible biological mechanism for gender roles