Anarchy means "no rulers". As such it's synonymous with the popular idea of equal human rights and fully compatible with equality under law. Every real crime is an instance of some people subjugating/ruling others on a small scale. Most current governments supposedly exist to support and defend equal rights, but end up incoherently mixing large scale organized crime into those efforts and putting some above the law as it applies to others.

Since the word 'anarchy' literally means the absence of rulers and subjugation, and crime/victimization is always an act of rule, a truly "full on anarchist society" would by definition be a perfectly peaceful and crime free utopia. It's perfectly reasonable to be concerned that people aiming at that sort of ideal may fail and make things worse instead of better, but I don't see how the goal itself can be rejected. Being an anarchist just means opposing all subjugation consistently as long as any of it exists. Anything other than anarchy means rejecting equal rights and defending some particular acts of subjugation as appropriate.

Of course it's unrealistic. None of us really expect all crime and oppression to cease in the foreseeable future. That doesn't mean we should support or defend any particular instances of it or any particular perpetrators of it.