*I apologize for the grammatical errors. I did not write this scenario; it's an image.
The above scenario appeared in a group I frequent on Facebook, and I found that I read it wrong at first, then got something else wrong when I re-read it. I wanted to separate it from the group and parse it for clarity, although there is one thing I got right about the scenario off the bat: it is definitely rape. You can disagree with me, but consent was withdrawn. When consent is withdrawn, it's a full stop. You do not keep going. If you do, you are committing the crime of rape.
This might not be a necessary exercise for everyone, but since people had all sorts of things to add and all sorts of questions to ask, it might be good for other folks as well. That's why I'm doing it here, and not simply in a Notepad document for myself. It's important, because there seems to be question about consent where none should exist.
This couple was having consensual sex...
So, consent was there initially. So far, so good.
...she reached her climax before him...
When I first read this part, my tired mind (I've slept about three hours in the past 48) inserted a "because" in front. I realized my error after I re-read it. Because of the initial misunderstanding, I interpreted her action as selfish, but there is no actual evidence of selfishness on her part in this scenario.
...and wanted him to stop thereafter.
Someone questioned this part of it. Did she actually communicate her desire for him to stop explicitly? When I went back and re-read it after that question was asked, I didn't re-read it all the way, so I said that assuming it was communicated at all, he should have stopped. It didn't have to be assumed, as we will see later.
He didn't stop right away because he also wanted his orgasm...
Now here, we see evidence of selfishness. He wanted to get off, so he kept going, even though she said to stop. Why did she want him to stop? Obviously, he was not sensitive enough to her needs, emotional or physical, to find out. He just wanted his orgasm. She wanted him to stop, but he didn't. Rape. Clear-cut. Consent withdrawn.
...she later reported him for rape, claiming that he didn't stop after she said, "Stop."
The only problem she's going to have is that it's her word against his...sadly. If she did say, "Stop," she meant for him to stop. Whatever her reason, he should not have continued. There's no other way to interpret this scenario, based on the information given. It is rape, and he should not have raped her. He should have at least stopped to find out why she wanted to stop, and shouldn't have continued without her consent in any event. She might have had to urinate, might have a medical concern, might feel nauseous all of a sudden, might have a cramp...it doesn't matter. It's a full stop scenario. That's it.
What's your take on this? Was she raped?
Yes. Yes, she was. He ignored her when she communicated that she wanted him to stop. There is no scenario where it's okay to continue after she withdraws consent.
I hope this helps more people to understand the scenario and understand that consent can be withdrawn for any reason at any time.