You were doing well before this nonsense. You want an actual scenario that is the same as this one? A light skinned black girl has sex with a racist white guy without telling him she is black. He never asked because he just assumed she was white. He doesn't consent to sleep with black girls because of his prejudices. Do you consider that rape?
No one is obligated to disclose personal information in order to sort things out with other people's prejudices. It is not rape by deception. No one is disclosing everything about themselves to people just in case it ticks one of their unwanted boxes. The only reason people are okay calling out transwomen for this is because they are transphobic.
Yeah, that would be rape too. You lined out of scenario where one of the partners had explicit conditions under which they would not have sex, and the other person knowingly violated them. Just because the guy is a walking piece of shit doesn't mean that his conditions can be arbitrarily ignored as long as they are communicated. Should we start deciding whether or not a woman's preconditions matter or not based on how good of a person she is, too?
The only reason this is even up for debate is because trans people feel like their identity is being violated in having to disclose that they are trans. I can sympathize with that personal desire to keep something secret, but someone with herpes would be deeply embarrassed to disclose that as well, yet we expect them to so that nobody's conditional consent is violated. There's no special exception here. Conditional consent is conditional consent, no matter how badly you would want to willfully mislead someone because it makes you feel better.
I didn't line out explicit conditions, only implicit ones. We are having a miscommunication here. I already stated earlier that if asked directly, a transwoman should be required to disclose the truth. But the onus is not on her to do so without being asked. Some people clearly believe she is obligated to do so without question. ---