In rape, consent is not asked for or even apparently wanted. Activity is at the direction of the aggressor. By force, coercion, deception or threat.
In rape, it is presumed that a full sexual act occurred, whatever orifice was penetrated. With penis, digits or toys.
In rape, there is presumption of power misused. Rather than that sexual contact is desired. Some level of predation may be implied, rather than a mishandled or misunderstood negotiation.
Having sought consent, they go beyond what is agreed to (by accident or design?) , or ignore it. But it was present in the dialogue. In rape, I don’t think it was fully sought. Isn’t there a presumption from the wording of CVs that it was given, then overcome or withdrawn?
In consent violation, isn’t there a presumption that somewhere there was a relationship, an agreement to engage? Whereas a rapist could in theory be a stranger walking down the street, whether or not they often are?
In consent violation, it could be any breached agreement. Agreeing to be tied up, agreeing to be flogged, etc. It doesn’t preclude sex, but it doesn’t necessarily include it either. And it doesn’t require full sexual penetration. More in the lines of molestation or sexual assault, rather than rape. Though rape might also be plausible?
And In consent violation, it presumes the person acted upon is ABLE and WILLING to consent, but for some reason this was changed after the activity had begun?
And In consent violation, isn’t there also an implication that either fetish, kink and/or bdsm was part of the equation? Whereas with rape that isn’t necessarily so? May not often be?
So if a feminist is discussing consent or rape culture, is it a given that they are discussing consent as a violation of play or protocol? Or could it be a violation of the relationship or trust, without being applicable to kink culture?