They are not accusing Assange of anything; the women's complaints are not about the Assange case at all, but Melzer's comments on rape generally. Melzer seems confused about what constitutes rape in some countries and like you, finds it expedient to make out that such definitions only apply in Sweden.
Once again, in case you missed it:
(Melzer) "True, soon after the US had encouraged allies to find reasons to prosecute Assange, two women made the headlines in Sweden. One of them claimed he had ripped a condom, and the other that he had failed to wear one, in both cases during consensual intercourse — not exactly scenarios that have the ring of ‘rape’ in any language other than Swedish."
As I pointed out in the other part of this thread (http://members5.boardhost.com/xxxxx/msg/1561972792.html),
this is legally incorrect.
The woman whose comments have featured so far have not strayed from this point. Only Melzer is confused, along with his supporters who can't believe their point is not about Assange and who seem to be crying 'smear' without foundation.
" If one is going to call consensual sex 'rape' then one is undermining the definition of rape almost to the point that it becomes meaningless and that's rather dangerous for women."
You have a point there; in the Assange case the two women said there was consent. It's pretty unusual for the accusation to be made by a third party though and Melzer's comments are not representative of the law in general. Cheers