It's really tricky ground within 'traditional' feminist narrative. At first glance it reads that he doesn't understand what has happened, perhaps doesn't believe her. And that has caused women so many issues throughout history.
But what has happened?
It's his description of what this women said, obviously, so maybe it's not accurate, but there is actually zero indication that she was coerced into sex in these scenarios.
To me it read as someone who had become so passive, who had no real principle of action, or even intent, that she felt like she hadn't actually made a decision to have sex. She was just going through the motions, so to speak.
If you combine that sort of mindset - and I've met people like that over the years, who live their lives drifting - with rhetoric about explicit consent and the idea that if you feel violated it means you have been raped, it seems entirely possible that someone like that might say - oh, wait, I didn't really mean all that to happen and I felt upset later, I must have been raped. It might be a relief because it would allow a sort of explanation for what was happening in her life, without needing to focus on what she really wants or believes in.
I know many people are uncomfortable with the idea that someone could be so lacking in self-reflection or self-conciousness - but don't we see examples of that all the time in other areas?
Total thought experiment really, but I wondered, reading the account, if this woman might not have been sexually abused as a child, which sometimes can result in that sort of passive response. If so, trying to attach her pain to these experiences as an adult might be a way of avoiding more real and disturbing thoughts.
Obviously if the description is false, none of that applies, but I don't see why we'd assume that.