The term "rape" can be deployed in this situation because Emily did not consent to having unprotected sex with someone who had an std. She asked him if he was clean, he lied and said no. She consented to having sex with someone who was clean, or at least believed themselves to be clean. Yes, this was naive, but it doesn't change the fact that she had sex under a non-consensual precedent. If Johan did not know he had a disease, it would not be rape. But the fact that he DID know means he knowingly garnered consent under false pretense, rendering the act non-consensual. Emily was naive, Johan was straight up evil.