Uhhhh.... I know I should stop, and I really need to get off the computer. But I can't help it. You said:

To turn this around and effectively say, "Stop wrongly perceiving the situation -- you won't be vilified for saying 'no' and you should know that and take responsibility for saying 'no' when you're uncomfortable" -- that is blame the victim 101. You're deflecting responsibility to unambiguously ask for consent away from the OP and laying blame onto the OP's partner for not saying 'no' "when he should have." It does not work like that.

Where do you draw the line between what you call blaming the victim and taking responsibility for your own well being?

You said: here can be many types of coercion in the world, and when sex is not vigorously refused out of relenting to some form of coercion, whether it is coercion by succumbing to a drug, coercion from a knife or gun drawn on you, or, crucially, coercion based in the fear that your adequacy as a partner or your identity or your social status will be threatened if you refuse -- in any of those cases -- if the other partner does not go out of their way to unambiguously confirm consent, then it is rape.

I think that I see a difference between defining coercion as brute force or even emotional blackmail and fear about one's adequacy as a partner or social status. I think that at some point you've got to suck it up--man or woman. I just don't think that's blaming the victim, and, personally, I think it's insulting to women I know who have been raped.

Okay...so really now...I know we are not going to get anywhere with this and I must to bed.

Very interesting discussion though.