That's an odd choice by Gibson, since it directly contradicts several other statement by Gandhi on the subject of rape. Gandhi's views on women were complicated and difficult to easily condense down, but to understand his views on this subject you need to understand that he thought women should ideally be modest, married, pious, and peaceful. That seems a bit sexist until you realize that's what he thought everyone should be. As such he viewed women's protection of their "honor" as an ultimate good. This combines rather uniquely with his ideals of self-sacrifice, but nowhere does he suggest a woman passively accept being assaulted, quite the opposite.

In 1938, Gandhi responded to a letter from a female Punjabi student^1 complaining of being harassed in the street and wondering what the correct solution is. Gandhi insists that men who do such a thing must be publicly shamed, ultimately leading to the practice to becoming culturally unacceptable. He does have this aside on more dire circumstances though:

But if perchance they find, as they may, that their very chastity is in danger of being violated, they must develop courage enough to die rather than yield to the brute in man. It has been suggested that a girl who is gagged or bound so as to make her powerless even for struggling cannot die as easily as I seem to think. I venture to assert that a girl who has the will to resist can burst all the bonds that may have been used to render her powerless. The resolute will give her the strength to die. But this heroism is possible only for those who have trained themselves for it. Those who have not a living faith in non-violence will learn the art of ordinary self-defence and protect themselves from indecent behaviour of unchivalrous youth.

That is Gandhi, saying that the ideal is that a woman should kill herself, rather than submitting to rape. A similar sentiment may be found in in an article from 1940.^2 It is part of a response to the question, "How is one to protect the honour of women?" This contains one of his more controversial statements, so I'm producing the quote more fully here:

[W]here there is a non­violent atmosphere, where there is the constant teaching of Ahimsa, woman will not regard herself as dependent, weak or helpless. She is not really helpless when she is really pure. Her purity makes her conscious of her strength. I have always held that it is physically impossible to violate a woman against her will. The outrage takes place only when she gives way to fear or does not realize her moral strength. If she cannot meet the assailant's physical might, her purity will give her the strength to die before he succe­eds in violating her. Take the case of Sita. Physically she was a weakling before Ravana, but her purity was more than a match even for his giant might. He tried to win her with all kinds of allurements but could not carnally touch her without her consent. On the other hand, if a woman depends on her own physical strength or upon a weapon she possesses, she is sure to be discomfited whenever her strength is exhausted.

Again, this is Gandhi saying that a woman following the proper path of non-violence would die, by her own hand, rather than being raped. The allusion to the Ramayana, however, gives some indication that this is not the ideal outcome; Sita survived her captivity by Ravana unscathed. In Gandhian thought, moral strength will always trump physical force. Ideally this occurs with the aggressor being overcome by this righteousness, but if not, then self-sacrifice in accordance with your own ideals is preferable to submission or violence.

Or maybe not. A couple years later, Gandhi would write in response to the question, "What should women and the public do under such circumstances [of a soldier sexually assaulting a woman]?"^3 While re-iterating the sentiment expressed above, Gandhi did make a rare allowance for violence, before espousing a more detailed take on the subject:

It is my firm conviction that a fearless woman, who knows that her purity is her best shield can never be dishonoured. However beastly the man, he will bow in shame before the flame of her dazzling purity... But such courage cannot be acquired in a day. Meantime we must try to explore other means. When a woman is assaulted she may not stop to think in terms of himsa or ahimsa. Her primary duty is self-protection. She is at liberty to employ every method or means that come to her mind in order to defend her honour. God has given her nails and teeth. She must use them with all her strength and, if need be, die in the effort. The man or woman who has shed all fear of death will be able not only to protect himself or herself but others also through laying down his life. In truth we fear death most, and will ultimately submit to superior physical force. Some will bend the knee to the invader, some will resort to bribery, some will crawl on their bellies or submit to other humiliation, and some women will even give their bodies rather than die. I have not written this in a carping spirit. I am only illustrating human nature. Whether we crawl on our bellies or whether a woman submits to the lust of a man is symbolic of the same love of life which makes us stoop to anything. Therefore only he who loses his life shall save it.

I quoted that at length, because it really does illustrate the Gandhian ideal of, to put it glibly, death before dishonor. If one is committed to living a pure and righteous life, then dying to avoid compromising that life is not only expected, but the proper course of action. Gandhi, however, realizes that not everyone can live up to this path, and does not blame them in the least. Nowhere though, does he say that a woman should passively submit to her attacker, instead espousing fighting to the death if needs be. Perhaps Gibson has some writing of which I am not aware, or perhaps she is being poetical with regards to Gandhi's ideals of non-violence. Gandhi's approach to women, as noted earlier, is complicated to begin with, and even more complicated by that fact that he was writing for an audience in a different time and under different circumstances than today. Since she seems to be the source of this quote, I would recommend you try to contact her directly and respectfully.

On a side note, this is what Gandhi has to say about a woman who has been sexually assaulted (from the same article as above):

Whilst the woman has in point of fact lost her virtue, the loss cannot render he in any way liable to be condemned or treated as an outcast. She is entitled to our sympathy for she has been cruelly injured, and we should treat her wounds as we would those of any injured person.

---

The quotations here all come from a newspaper Gandhi published, Harijan.

^(1 Dec. 31, 1938, pp. 4-5)

^(2 Sep. 1, 1940, p. 2)

^(3 Mar. 1, 1942, p. 5)