Definitely agree. Focusing on the choice of using "it" as a pronoun in order to allegedly expose some underlying belief in human beings as inanimate objects is a low blow indeed. It's seeing patterns where they don't exist. If you already have suspicions about a group of people, you're going to have an interpretation bias.
I have never heard an argument for the "objectification" model that was based in any form of reality, as opposed to sex-negative delusion. And I've heard a lot.
There is, perhaps, the occasional Ed Gein, who literally sees people as unthinking, unfeeling, disposable tools for his personal enjoyment, but this is an extreme (and thankfully rare) pathology, and it is not fair to extrapolate it in any meaningful way to the standard model of sexual dynamics.