re: College expels "rapist" for having consensual sex

So I just finish watching the movie Edge of Tomorrow. The movie had a commercial before the previews about consensual sex (no means no). It had Daniel Craig, Obama, Biden, etc. speaking about no consent sex is wrong/illegal and we need to stop it from happening. The commercial had me thinking about the whole concept of no means no with regards to this thread.

Is the whole point of no means no to punish sexual predators or to empower women, feminist (based on the thought that men are the rapist and women are victims)? The reason why I am asking this I believe that in this case the sex was consensual on both parties, believing the article is 100 percent accurate.

Usually liberal and/or progressives lead the way on this belief that if a woman is intoxicated she can’t consent to consensual sex. How would these same people react, if that they believe if a person is intoxicated they can’t consent to sex, if the two people in the article happen to be gay men. In this case, who would be the victim and who would be the rapist. Would it be the first person to cross the finish line and state that he was rape? Would you believe that the school would kick out the student “charged” in the rape or would they not bother in this case. If the school would not bother in this case, how would the gay lobby react in this case. Would they go after one of their own or would they go after the school with regards about not respecting gay rights.

It seems to me this is more about women’s rights than about punishing sexual predators.