It's a nice theory, but it doesn't stand up to an examination of the attitudes towards rape in different societies at different times, and how those in turn relate to the
sexual mores of those societies.
As a generalisation, the more repressed a society is sexually, the lower the status of women, the more debased the value of their bodies as inviolate entities etc., the less that society tends to react angrily to rape. To put it in the terms of the original writeup, it's a simple equation: the more a woman is considered to be "sexual chattel", the less "hysterical" the societal response (as measured, for example, in jail terms / convictions) will be.
To give just one recent and pretty uncontroversial example, in western countries it was only within the last 10-20 years that rape within the confines of marriage was acknowledged to be a criminal act. The traditional position being that by marrying a woman had given implicit consent to her husband's using her body as and when best suited him; thereby, inasmuch as rape is defined as sex against one party's will or without their informed consent, making the very act an impossibility.
It was only with the emancipation of women outside the home that the inegrity of their bodies as such became a legitimate subject of discussion. In many more traditional societies, not only will women not react "hysterically" to the plight of their violated sisters, but will willingly participate in their punishment as adulteresses (in much the same way that it is women who often help perpetuate the traditions of female genital mutilation).
In short, if anyone thinks that the modern discourse about rape is too impassioned, it is not the murky depths of the patriarchy, but the giddy heights of emancipation that are to blame.
Of course rape is not like any other assault - it is an assault which has a single psychological aim and mean to gain no pecuniary, larcenous or defensive advantage. A rapist is someone who expresses their pathological (if often only momentary) need to humiliate, dominate, debase and dehumanise another person. While I'm happy to say that I do not speak from experience, I would hesitate to encourage the abolition of the offense as a distinct and abhorrent crime.