Under English and Welsh law, consent is not what the woman think but what the man thinks.
If he honestly and reasonably believed that you consented then you weren't raped under English law. So in fact only the man knows if you were raped - talk about men controlling women's bodies.
So you were clear that you didn't consent to sex without a condom, but your subsequent actions in bed can lead him to reasonable believe that you changed your mind.
He might be lying about that or might genuinely think that you did change your mind.
The law of MN is quite rightly to believe and support you. The law of the land is not so gentle.
I know you realise that your 'case' wouldn't stand up in court. But others on this thread don't seem to agree with that. And that worried me.
In court, the Prosecution have to make the Jury sure that the woman is honest, accurate and reliable and that the man is lying about his belief in consent. The Prosecution have to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt or so that the jusry is sure that the man is a rapist.
Some men on the jury would be flabbergasted that you could confuse their precious penises with a finger.
In court it might play out as: he was on top. You knew exactly where his hands were and more to the point you knew exactly where his penis was. Your legs were open. His penis was right up agains your vagina. You knew that. In fact you kept pushing your vagina towards his penis. He wasn't pinning you down. You were both moving, fondling and caressing each other. You kept on moving your vagina towards him. Of course you knew it was his penis. His hands were fondling your breasts, stroking your legs. His penis was exactly where it always is and exactly where you knew it was and you kept on moving towards it, stroking his penis with your vagina.
Some might not understand why you allowed direct genital contact if you were so worried about STIs. So you explain that you so weren't so much worried about genital contact but you didn't want him to ejaculate inside you. And in court that swiftly can become so you were happy to have sex, you just didn't want him to ejaculate inside you. So that is why you spoke to him mid-sex and immediately when you asked him to withdraw, he withdrew.
Many would find your use of the word comfortable an unlikely one to describe rape. Most people think rape is far more visceral than being uncomfortable. They would expect a woman who is being raped to behave differently, even though the Judge will give them directions that woman behave in many different ways both during rape and after being rped.
If the Judge allowed the jury to hear about the consensual sex the following morning, that would also bemuse many jurors. All men and most women who haven't been raped and even some who have, would struggle to understand how a sensible rational woman could have sex with a man less than 12 hours after he raped her.
For what my opinion is worth, I think you were raped OP. But what is the answer to this question: have you suffered because of the rape? Sorry for such a brutal question and please don't answer it because I realise I am late to the thread and this is a very personal situation.
In many ways I hope you haven't suffered, but the reason why I say in many ways is because if rape doesn't cause suffering then perhaps it isn't always that serious. And that is a thought that I find very, very worrying.
Perhaps that is why so many are saying that you weren't raped. Because for them rape is the most serious of crimes with the most hideous of consequences for the victim and not something that can be discussed and dissected calmly, logically and easily.
OP, I hope you are able to find peace. If you can't, perhaps start from the position of the man not being a rapist but someone who genuinely thought you might have changed your mind. Is it possible that anything you, as a couple, did in bed could have lead a decent man to think she wants sex even though we don't have a condom? If not, you have the answer to your question. Once again I hope you find peace.