If a woman finishes before a man during sex and he continues is he raping her?
<p>If I orgasm multiple times during sex and I am to exhausted to continue but my man partner continues to thrust in me then is he raping me or is it ok because it started out willing on both of our parts? I asked him to stop but he didn't and I cried and begged.</p>

<p>The question is not properly framed in terms of the law: the relevant question isn't in terms of achieving orgasm or not, it is in terms of consent. Is it rape to continue having sex, when one party withdraws consent? In North Carolina, following <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/north-carolina/supreme-court/1979/51-1.html" rel="noreferrer">State v. Way</a> (rather sparse on details), consent explicitly cannot be withdrawn. In Illinois, on the other hand, under <a href="http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/documents/072000050K11-1.70.htm" rel="noreferrer">720 ILCS 5/11-1.70(c)</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>A person who initially consents to sexual penetration or sexual
  conduct is not deemed to have consented to any sexual penetration or
  sexual conduct that occurs after he or she withdraws consent during
  the course of that sexual penetration or sexual conduct.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In South Dakota, it is not clear. In <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/south-dakota/supreme-court/1994/18161-1.html" rel="noreferrer">State v. Jones</a>, 521 N.W.2d 662, there was a proposed jury instruction stating</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>An act of sexual intercourse does not constitute rape, where the
  female initially consents to the act, but after penetration, withdraws
  her consent, and the male, without interruption of penetration,
  continues the act against the will of the female and by means of
  force.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The proposed authority for such an instruction was 
the California case <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/172/237.html" rel="noreferrer">People v. Vela</a>, 172 Cal. App. 3d 237, where it was conclude that continued intercourse after consent is withdrawn is not rape. But the South Dakota court rejected that ruling and instruction, and the defendant was convicted. But: the court also found that the victim <em>submitted</em>, and didn't consent – in other words, South Dakota has not definitively answered the question. The California finding was ultimately overturned by the California Supreme Court in <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-supreme-court/1330844.html" rel="noreferrer">re John Z</a>, finding that</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>A woman has an absolute right to say “no” to an act of sexual
  intercourse.   After intercourse has commenced, she has the absolute
  right to call a halt and say “no more,” and if she is compelled to
  continue, a forcible rape is committed.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The general answer in the US that it is legally undecided: it is definitely decided in California and Illinois that intercourse past the withdrawal of consent is rape, and in North Carolina that it is not. <a href="https://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/falserape/false-rape-625.pdf" rel="noreferrer">This article</a> cites other case law, but on average, it has has not been clearly determined if continuing intercourse after withdrawal of consent constitutes rape.</p>

united-states sexual-assault rape alabama