It’s an odd quirk but we do have these quirks in law - and offences the other way are treated as rape, just not prosecuted as such. It remains sexual assault.

And yes, we do have laws to cover coercive control and other such intimidation - consent has to be given freely and in some cases, even when legal, outside of particular power structures too. However, it is quite a steep legal hill to climb.

Your argument is a good one - and it would certainly be the prosecution angle I’d pick. However, you’d have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused firmly believed the ‘yes’ was a lie. If the 50 questions were concurrent and immediate, you might get a judge or jury to agree - but if those 50 questions were on different days, or the defence could point out any change of circumstance at all, then I think you’d struggle.

You’ve hit on what I’d argue is the correct feminist position. We not only have to teach the next generation the meaning of ‘no’ , we also have to teach them the meaning of ‘yes’ and we have to be absolutely certain to teach all of them about the gaps between the two where legal cases will fall down - because it is awful for everyone involved to wade in the moral grey with only the weapons of black and white at your disposal.

That is why I wrote this article as a response. It muddies the water. It makes things unclear. You cannot and should not tell people that 49 x no and 1 x yes does not mean you have consented. You have. Perhaps under duress. Perhaps inadvisably. But we do have to be clear - and that’s a difficult (but necessary) conversation to have - unfortunately the OP was not prepared or perhaps not psychologically equipped to have it. That’s difficult because, to my mind at least, that makes her part of the problem and not the solution. Writing a popular position is not the same as writing a responsible one.

Thanks for dropping by, you’re giving my insomnia brain something to do. :o)