To begin...what!? I can sort of understand the mistaken "doing virtual violent things will make you violent" logic or even the "shooting virtual guns will teach you how to shoot real guns" craziness, but the names abilities contributing to the incidence of rape?
Second, how the fuck are these people "experts"? It would be really nice if news organisations would stop just assuming anyone from an "Institute" is a reliable source. At least for the violence connection there's some (bad) experimental evidence, but I very much doubt there's any in this case. These are just psychologists speculating wildly, even the more reputable ones. As it turns out, the wild speculation of psychologists isn't much more accurate than the wild speculation of anyone else.
And where are all of these violent sex acts that are causing an increase in rape? I can't think of virtually any violent sex acts in mainstream games and can in truth think of very few even nonviolent sex acts in games. Sex is still something of a taboo subject in games.
And finally, I think they're probably right about the ESRB, but it needs more than just enforcement, it needs something approaching a reasonable rating system. Just as with films, game ratings are far too subjective and meaningless to be enforced as they stand. The main case against enforcement of sales restrictions is that the things being rated can be effectively censored by putting them into the highest age bracked. But that already happens with videogames anyway: when's the last time you saw an AO game in a store? Hell, I'm not sure I've ever even seen the AO seal on anything in real life.