I have no argument with that, Max. Indeed, I have made the point quite demonstrably in some of what I've written on this topic.

However, that fact does not change the validity of my response to you.

An implication is a judgment call based on a set of particular circumstances, factors, etc. So even when there is implied consent that is not equivalent to consent.

However, my response was actually focused on your using a personal and particular situation to, in effect, support the notion that it is valid for one person to engage in sexual activity with another whilst they are in no position to give or deny consent for such activity.

Such generalisation from the particular is invalid. Sadly, it all too often eventuates in discussion and debate. Indeed, this flaw is at the basis of most prejudice and false judgment of others, whether individuals or groups.

The point is that it is neither logically nor rationally valid.