To clarify, I'm saying that because individual requests for consent would get quickly ridiculous, requiring explicit consent only once, to the general category of "sexual acts", would be acceptable. And maybe require additional requests for something that seems odd, like using an unconventional orifice, but that's something that's strongly up to individual preference and as long as you're willing to apologize for a misunderstanding if it turns out your partner didn't expect that, I'm not going to be particularly harsh as long as the general consent was given clearly.
But that consent, from either party, can have conditions attached (wear a condom), and be revoked at any time (saying no when he wakes you up). Yes, there are potentially situations in which the latter is a nasty thing to do, but I cannot think of one where it's worse than respecting somebody's decision about it. And if you're not respecting those limitations, then it's falling outside of consent.
Now, I'll admit, there is a lot of gray area with a not-instantly-jumping-to-sex relationship. And, maybe I'm wrong on this, but the less extremely sexual the act in question is, the less vital it is to be unambiguous. It's less acceptable to penetrate someone than it would be to fondle that person than it would be to kiss that person than it would be to hold that person's hand, assuming that all of this is something the person doesn't really want. When you're getting to sex, I'm encouraging clarity because errors have much more far-reaching consequences.
And I haven't touched on the practicality of enforcing this legally. Effective implementation on a legal basis would require preposterous violations of privacy. I'm not really talking about the law here. I'm just talking about how I feel people ought to conduct themselves. I may well be wrong, and I certainly have no power to enforce it (nor should I), but it is still something I feel is reasonable to discuss.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and with regards Assange specifically... Before the extradition thing where his lawyers didn't even try denying it, I was unsure who to believe, because in both cases it worked out to presuming guilt of somebody in advance. However, at this point, it seems much likelier that their accounts are accurate, so I feel like what I've been talking about does apply to him.