Thanks for linking the Wiki page on mansplaining and including that very nice and academic definition for posterity (I'm guessing). My disagreement with the term doesn't come from an unfamiliarity with it. It's a silly term which is analytically and philosophically reductive, not to mention conversationally toxic, IMO. You're using the term correctly but I think the term is not correct.
As for your other thoughts, I do think there is a deeper disagreement here on the philosophy of suffering. It's been historically difficult to measure pain, suffering, etc., obviously, and create some kind of taxonomy of it as we could never agree on the parameters, and yes, it may not be psychologically helpful to a victim of harassment to say, "Hey, at least you didn't get raped." But the fact that you already distinguish between "random ass people who have no experience with assault and trauma" and those who have experienced assault and trauma means that there are degrees and it doesn't "only matter for punishment so that the sentence fits the crime." It isn't with the goal of making people like Louis CK feel better but rather not flattening out the wide and varied experiences of pain felt by those who have been sexually wronged.
EDIT: Re: Aggroculture- very unfortunate for your wife to deal with shitty, condescending people, and, if they are condescending to her because she's a female professor, even worse! I think the term and the idea of deconstruction is not accurate because it only goes so far and then retroactively tries to explain social dynamics, and the models which come out of those critique-based schools of thought aren't themselves open to deconstruction and critique. For instance, a male boss can say the same snooty remark to a male employee and a female employee; it may be labeled as toxic masculine competition in the former and mansplaining in the latter, but true intersectionality (which does has many social benefits) would always require you to go deeper into the boss's psyche and social influences (not to mention neurological and genetic), so why stop there? It's reductive and retroactive on large scale and I think counter-productive on a small scale.
I'm sorry for having hijacked this thread in this way.