Well, I was very young, so the lesbian rape scene made the movie far scarier than anything in Dracula. Or most other movies.
What I find intriguing about that scene is the way the fig leaf of "vampirism" allowed Universal to get away with a "lesbian rape" scene in a way they never could have if they had stripped away the supernatural hugger-mugger.
Without the Dracula gimmick, you have a predatory older woman luring a vulnerable young woman up to her garrett to "pose" for her, getting her to disrobe, and then (vaguely) having her way with her. Hard to imagine a scene like that flying in a mainstream drama back in 1936--but it's okay in "Dracula's Daughter" because they can pretend that the Countess is only
hungry for Lily's blood . . . .
("It's all about nutrition . . . really! Not sex!")
It's also amusing that generations of us kids grew up watching the show on the late show because, without a peep from our parents, because, on the surface, it's about a vampire, not a lesbian.
(Never mind that the whole plot is about a woman struggling with "unnatural" urges she can't control, to the extent that she consults a psychiatrist about it!)
I read somewhere that the censors insisted on a scene immediately afteward the garrett scene where a coroner explicitly states that poor Lily had her blood drained out--just so the audience wouldn't think that something else might have happened after the fade-out . . . .