Activities after rape should not be used to determine if rape occurred. Some people sit in the corner and cry, some get on with their lives.
Nonconsensual sex is rape. Whether Assange is guilty of it isn't for me (or you) to determine. That's a matter for the courts. There's a lot of blame to go around for how this has been handled.
I respect Assange's determination; I really didn't think he'd last very long before giving up, but he's sticking this out far longer than most believed he would. I also am not opposed to his mission, though it's still pretty one-sided against the US government and some of the things he's claimed have been in cables aren't really what's being said. I'd like to see more from other countries, particularly those in Africa and Asia. Still, I think he's far too stuck on the idea that the Swedes would turn him over to the US government when the UK's extradition treaty is far easier to use, though I don't think he's done anything wrong under US law as he wasn't in the US when he received the information, he's not a US citizen or resident, and he holds no loyalties to the country. Maybe there's an argument for incitement, but that requires some pretty significant proof, and courts (with tons of amici filings by media organizations) may not be keen to agree on that abridgment of free speech. Arguments for damage to national security are similarly thin, especially given the claims of damage in the Pentagon Papers and other
I don't know enough about Swedish law to determine whether the prosecutor could travel to another country for the required interview; I've seen claims that they can or can't, that it's OK under some circumstances but not others. Perhaps it's a point of principle to not do it under circumstances where the accused has such a high degree of control; if he were questioned in the embassy and charges were filed, would he then give up, or would he continue his fugitive status?
Even if Sweden drops the charges (or he waits them out completely), he's not leaving the embassy without getting arrested for bail jumping. He's almost certain to get the maximum sentence (one year) for doing so, and to spend it incarcerated. Once that's finished, I expect he'll be deported to Australia (which I believe also has an easily-implemented extradition treaty with the US), and that relatively few countries will accept him in the future, assuming Australia doesn't revoke his passport. Ecuador might take him in (though the Australian government and those of the nations surrounding Ecuador could make this difficult even if Ecuador did issue travel papers), but that may change with the 2017 elections, since Rafael Correa is term-limited to two terms under the 2008 constitution (he was first elected under that constitution in 2009 and re-elected in 2013).
Whatever happens, it is unlikely that any court, in whatever country, is going to ever grant him bail in the future.