How is providing evidence for a counter-argument ‘trollish’ behavior, Doofenschmirtz?

You and OP are dumb for bringing that argument to this discussion because it has nothing to do with intimate partner violence which the article is about. Let me ask you since you know everything, what point are you trying to make to further this discussion? Or do you just like being obtuse?

His argument is that somehow the rate at which men are murdered relates to intimate partner murder rates. He’s setting up a strawman and is wrong for doing so.

Your example is not relevant to this conversation, which is about intimate partner violence. Admit you’re wrong.

Is it a coincidence that it’s the perfect amount to buy the new Wu Tang album?

It’s called rape by fraud. The victim in this case thought she was consenting to sex with an entirely different person. In your hypotheticals, as long as both parties consented to sexual contact with one another (and throughout the encounter) then there would be no violation.