"Your Honor, I had consensual sex with this man for 10 minutes and 10 seconds of this time was painful, haul his butt to prison!".
Judge: "Young lady, did this man stop before copulating?"
"Why yes he did but I feel he took too long to stop, send this man to prison!?.
I think it might be worth pointing out that your continual reference to "prison" implies you are thinking about legal consequences and potential "gray areas" in assigning guilt.
Others, however, seem to be focused on general issues of consent and reaction to that consent.
Legally, Rape is a little tough to define since the definition can vary from state to state, province to province and country to country. In the U.S., were lack of "consent" or "withdrawal of consent" the only element- Then the rule of reason would apply. When you received the withdrawal of consent or reasonably should have received the withdrawal of consent- then you are required to stop immediately. That that immediacy is also subject to the rule of reason. Thus the question is did you stop within a reasonable time.
But what is reasonable, you might want to know... Well, look around. You would get a jury of twelve for a rape case. They would determine whether your response was reasonable. Thus, to some degree it is a case by case basis. You can put up the "throws of passion" defense- the other side can put up the "even a fraction of a second is too much" prosecution. But, ultimately it will be up to the jurors to decide whether you acted within reason.
Now, I am willing to wager that you would be hard-pressed to actually find a district attorney that would prosecute a case if you even took 5-10 seconds to wrap your mind around the fact that you were now harming your partner. Despite the fact that most would agree 5-10seconds is far too much time.
Now, while ideally I would suggest staying away from gender bias is a positive thing, rape is one of those instances where it is important to have both the gendered neutral and the gendered perspective at the forefront of the conversation.
The majority of men are fortunate and advantaged enough not to have to cope with the fear of being raped. While many males experience being raped (male-victim rape represents a highly unreported class of rape), society does not constantly subject men to the prospect of rape, physiologically men are more capable of rape, and post-pubescence men are statistically more capable of overpowering women.
So, sit back and imagine you have in the back of your mind a worry, or a fear that you could be raped. You are reminded of this every time you walk across that unlit parking area alone, every time you walk down the dark alley, hell, every time you find yourself around that creepy guy with no one else in earshot distance.
Next comes the hard part- accept that no matter how hard you can imagine you will likely (and hopefully) never be able to fully appreciate the female perspective on this subject. No amount of worry about getting beat up or killed can rightfully compare to facing the particular threat of these paired with being sexually violated as well.
(P.S. I am not saying that all women deal with this or live in fear, but were you to sit down and have honest dialogue I would imagine very few women would not have had at least a worry with regard to their physical-safety)
Now think about how you are saying the things that you are-
You have essentially acknowledged that your passionate sex could not guarantee your cognizance of your partner's sexual safety. Something which highly factors into many women's everyday lives.
I get that you are trying to clear up the area and draw lines. I understand that you are even bringing up factors which have been discussed in real court cases. But, when approaching rape from a legal perspective, clearly qualifying your discussion as such could instrumentally affect the receptivity toward your perspectives and questions.
