Considering that a large number, if not the majority (do not have to be married), will cheat at some point and an even larger majority would if they would get away with it, I guess this could be interesting. As we know, stealthing is charged as rape, which should be taken into account.

My comment was sparked by an older story of a father being once again ordered to pay child support for children that were the product of cheating.

Keep mind that cheating does not apply to consensual polyamory and so on.

Here was my intuitive response to reading that:

Lying about your std-relevant behaviour to a partner in order to trick him into sex inherently negates his consent. In this case, this std-relevant behaviour was actively made even more risky to the victim by the wife's refusal to use protection in form of proper usage of female or male condoms (which would still be a relevant risk and negate the consent of the husband - and so would kissing), therefore raising questions regarding an intent to harm the husbands life, who (unlike her, even if she does not do it) has no idea of his need to get tested and might die as a result.

Every instance of sex with her husband following the first instance of her std-relevant behaviour was based on lies about the circumstances and risks associated with that interaction, unconsensual and therefore to be considered rape.

I do not agree with the lack of nuance and differentiation in the usage of the term rape either - both in statutory and non-statutory cases, which show an enormous complexity and varience.

That being said, I feel its enforcement to be inconsistent in many ways, including gender and what does or does not negate consent.