I actually didn't phrase that the way I should have. You seemed to assume not only that attraction to the victim is a necessary condition for sexual assault (I still dispute that), but that the probability of assault scales with the degree of attraction. You cannot just assume either of these two clauses. An example of sexual assault not based on attraction is unsolicited physical contact in locker rooms, or other types of heterosexual-on-heterosexual assault for the purpose of bullying or humiliation. Honor rape and punitive forms of sexual assault are motivated by culture and law. Secondly, you would need to show a link between likelihood of assault and attraction. This would only account for cases where we can show that the assault is based on attraction, which is already put into question by the multiplicity of factors involved. Also, you would somehow need to measure both level of attraction and likelihood of assault, which I can't imagine are easy figures to calculate. Note: I am using the definition that sexual assault is unwanted sexual contact.