Psst…one way to get your answer would be to start a “would you rather” thread in The Game Room or better yet, participate in my Answer to Ask thread.
To the poster above me, it is called “curiosity”.
Women who rape other adult women are so rare that a quick search failed to produce any relevant statistics on them at all. I did easily turn up information about female-on-female murder: 140 known cases in 2011, about 24% of all murders committed by females. While some of the victims in these cases must have been children, I’d speculate that it’s still probably more likely that an adult woman will be murdered by another woman than that she’ll be raped by another woman. Anyway, in the absence of other evidence I would not assume that a female rapist would be more like the average woman than she is like the average rapist when it comes to the likelihood that she’s a murderer.
Incidentally, I was surprised to learn from the FBI stats that it’s apparently actually pretty unusual for rape victims to be murdered by their assailants. I assume there are plenty of murders where the police aren’t able to determine whether the victim had been raped or not, but according to the FBI’s stats for 2011 a woman is about as likely to be killed by an arsonist as she is by a rapist. Being killed in a robbery is much more common than either of those, but a majority of murders aren’t related to another felony at all.
Yet there’s apparently no reason to assume she wouldn’t be either…
Except that she’s already committing a violent crime, and acting way outside the norms for female behaviour - that’s a good reason to assume she’s not going to act like an average woman.
It seems to me that you might be projecting a little onto this - because you [think you] would feel less threatened by a woman, you assume a woman is objectively less threatening. But that’s not so for everyone - and if someone’s raping me, their gender isn’t really top of the list that makes the situation scary/humiliating/painful/etc, nor do I feel more likely to know how things will end up if it’s a woman doing the raping - less so, in fact, because there are so many fewer examples of it happening.
I thought it might be the case but it appears it’s not. I don’t really have a problem with that. I was just emphasizing the lack of evidence to those who seemed to think that what I thought (which I pointed out was just a feeling and not supported by evidence) was somehow ridiculous.
As nicole1912 has already pointed out, there’s a very good reason to assume a female rapist is more dangerous than the average woman – she’s a rapist. While the average woman is less likely to be a violent criminal than the average man*, just being a woman doesn’t put a female rapist in that large category of women who aren’t violent criminals. She’s already a violent criminal. This is presumably the same reason why you’d be more concerned that a male rapist might also be a killer than you would the average man. A man who’s raping you is already someone you know to be a violent criminal, he’s already chosen to attack you in particular, and he’d probably prefer that you not talk to the police about this later. Turning the man into a woman doesn’t change any of these factors.
As I mentioned, it looks like the vast majority of rapists do not in fact kill their victims, but I think it’s quite reasonable to assume that an individual who is committing a violent crime against you is more likely to kill you afterward than the average person who has not attacked you.
*Not that the average man is particularly likely to be a violent criminal either, it’s just that there are more violent criminals who are men than women.