Rape is a crime just like murder or aggravated assault are crimes but in the case of the latter two, common law allows a claim of self-defence which obviates criminal intent. If there is no criminal intent there is no crime. 

Maybe a person might use physical force and violence to defend themselves. This could be a laudable defence when there is proof of those extraordinary circumstances. There is nothing in any criminal code that says there is a defence for rape, though. None. Rape is a crime. 

Rape cannot exist when there is consent. That is why it is always a crime. The hurdle is to prove it happened and unequivocally prove the identity of the perpetrator, even though it is often a matter of the word of one person against another without corroborating evidence--rapist vs victim all over again. Ick. Apart from that hurdle, if it happened, and if you have identified the person who did the crime, it should be a clear-cut conviction. In this Reddit post you can read the ramblings of convicts who just went through the aforementioned process. It's OK if you think it sounds like they will likely do their crime again if given the chance because you are right. They will.

You might kill someone in self defence and a trial might find that you are not guilty of a crime; you can bop someone on the noggin in self defence to thwart an attack upon your person and a court may find you innocent; but under no circumstances is rape not a crime. Under no circumstances is there an excuse for rape. 

If after being convicted of rape a convict has some lame excuse, they are a rapist through and through; there is no remorse; there will be recidivism and this convict MUST NOT BE ON THE STREET.

These people who explain off their rape crime should have taken seriously their right to silence (STFU) because in their words is the implied suggestion that they will do the crime again owing to a faulty process of reasoning that ignores the rights of another. That's why they should be locked up.

To me this Reddit thread is also more proof that most criminals are very stupid. That doesn't necessarily mean low Intelligence Quotient (IQ). More than that it also hints that there is a high probability a rapist is a sociopath--or for some other reason is effectively a two-dimensional person who lacks empathy; has no conscience and seeks a reinforced sense of well-being derived from bringing harm (power and control) to another person. Read the Reddit thread again with that in mind and evaluate their comments again. These are very dangerous people who have very wrong cognitive patterns no matter the reason. Their candid comments are our fuel to energize a strong drive for lengthy jail terms for rapists.

A caring, normal, sensitive person who, while engaged in some consented interaction with another person, learns that the interaction causes distress, immediately stops and shows care and concern.

Bring that empathy process into sexual relations and consider that when one or both participants notice the objection or discomfort of the other, their arousal naturally ends. That's normal. Anything else is abnormal behaviour.

Think again about the Reddit thread. These are very dangerous people for whom the standard basis for human interaction--caring and sharing--does not exist and cannot exist. 

Maybe rehabilitation tools can salvage some of those criminals' lives and that might be a worthy consideration after every last rapist has been jailed for 50+ years. But until rape ends, let's not over-analyze the "excuses" , let's acknowledge that this kind of stereotypical thinking is the root of recidivism. 

Rapists cannot be in society.

 [Micheal]

(http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/x6yef/reddits_had_a_few_threads_about_sexual_assault/

and 

http://jezebel.com/5929544/rapists-explain-themselves-on-reddit-and-we-should-listen)