Nope, still too much bias against the falsely accused.
So to get this straight, you'd rather the situation where a woman:
Has been raped.
Has the strength to report it.
Has to go through intrusive medical examinations.
Has to relive the whole thing in a police interview.
Has to then relive the whole thing in court.
Has to then be interrogated by a defence lawyer in front of family, friends, judge and jury. Have their whole sexual history brought up, character assassinated.
Then loses the case on a technicality, maybe the defence sowed a seed of doubt because she was seen approaching him in the bar first on CCTV and initiated the first kiss.
Then because she's lost the case, the attacker can say "FALSE accusations, she's a nasty liar and she put me through hell.".
There's various punishments here:
The physical attack and mental pain that brings with it.
The whole court ordeal.
The attacker being found not guilty and no justice being served.
The victim's name then being slung around as a liar who tried to wreck someones life.
For a man falsely accused, he might have to deal with 2 or 3 of those punishments but he was never the victim of a physical attack and that's why the victim must have the balance tipped in their favour in what is a no win situation for anyone.