no, not all. she consented, but was surprised that he didn't use a condom. which could be legally interpreted as mutilation or rape in sweden. she didn't interpret it as rape at all
According to Swedish law, yes. Not necessarily according to the law in other countries. That's why it was called out that he may have committed Sweden's definition of rape.
Rape is a legal concept, but in a larger sense it is a moral concept. This concept does not change from nation-state to nation-state and even if no country in the world defined this behavior as legal rape, it is still rape. For centuries, marital rape was not considered legally rape (it is still quite difficult to prosecute); rape that begins after sex is initiated is still not considered rape in the United States (courts have acquitted in recognition of some absurd "right to finish"); rape of men by women is still not considered rape by the FBI.
All of these legalities are irrelevant. Assange committed rape, and would have committed rape in any country. Nation-states do not define rape; moral people recognize it.
Well fortunately/unfortunately the police do not camp outside of an embassy for years waiting to arrest someone and send them to another country for questioning because they may have broken a moral concept. They do that when there are laws being broken. So in this situation, all that matters is the law.
The question was "what is rape in the Swedish sense, and how is it different from rape anywhere else". The answer is, this type of sexual misconduct is considered rape in Sweden and not in many other places. Nation-states define laws, which is what the legal system is based off, so it doesn't matter what moral people recognize. It wouldn't have been legally rape in some other countries, and that's the answer to the question.
