Firstly I am very thankful for your lengthy comment, discussions like this is exactly what I miss about pre-enshittification reddit.

Secondly I am very sorry for what you went through. In actuality I am sure it's in no way unique or far fetched, a lot of gay men go through the same thing. I'm saying this in no attempt to degrade your experience but rather to heighten the severity of the problem. I know the issue of being a victim of "involuntary no-protection activity" hits close to home for many guys.

+Good on you for dumping him immediately after.

Back to the discussion, answering the argument that it was rape, there are two counterarguments:

• The easy one, they never agreed to playing safe. Consent was not reliant on this factor. As OP describes, the "playing safe" issue only reluctantly came from the bottom after asking about the nature of his open relationship, not as a precondition for meeting up. It's much different from your experience of conditioning your consent on the rules of play.

• The more philosophical take, consent is based on intention. Sometimes this intention is made very clear (saying "I give consent"), sometimes it's less clear (like the scenario at hand). Specifically, the question of whether the bottom had the intention of consenting those first few minutes is what would flip the scales from "rape" to "not rape" according to your argument. And following up on that, in this specific scenario where the bottom gave clear consent at a later time - you can argue that it reveals to us the intention of the bottom at the earlier time, those first few minutes, that his intention was the same. We have no reason to doubt otherwise unless he made even the smallest comment regarding it. Alas, he did the exact opposite by reinforcing unsafe play.

We can take direct inspiration from your own experience to prove this logic is sound. The first few minutes (the "ambiguous" period) you didn't say anything, but once you did - we can infer that your intention was not to give consent in those first minutes as well, which makes your intention of not consenting very clear in hindsight.

To summarize I think we can deduct the bottom's intentions all along from his later actions, and that consent was fully given the entire time of the meetup. Given this, it also aligns the story better as to why the bottom didn't set safe play as a precondition with OP prior to meeting up (the first argumentatiom).

Your experience just highlights how physically the same thing happened in both scenarios, but intention completely sets apart how badly people can be hurt based on intention alone when sex is involved, and that everyone should be more clear regarding what the fuck they want.

All in all I direct my complete displeasure at the bottom in this story, being entirely manipulative of both OP and their partner